Reiwa 5 (Gyo-U) 299 Case Seeking Confirmation of Unconstitutionality of Deprivation of Young Adults' Right to Stand for Election

In 2025, a group of young Japanese adults filed a constitutional lawsuit before the Tokyo District Court (Reiwa 5 Gyo-U 299) against the Japanese Government. The plaintiffs, aged between 18 and 24, argued that the Public Offices Election Act’s provisions setting the minimum candidacy age at 25 for the House of Representatives and 30 for the House of Councillors violate the constitutional guarantee of equality under Article 14 and the right to participate in public affairs. They claimed that while the voting age was lowered to 18 in 2016, the unreasonably high candidacy age deprives young adults of their eligibility to stand for election, resulting in unconstitutional discrimination and underrepresentation of youth in the Diet. The lawsuit sought a declaratory judgment confirming the unconstitutionality of the statutory age requirements and state compensation.

In 2025, the Tokyo District Court dismissed the plaintiffs' claims. The court ruled that the age qualifications for candidacy serve a legitimate legislative purpose, ensuring a certain level of maturity and life experience for lawmakers. It held that setting such age limits falls within the reasonable discretionary power of the Diet and does not constitute an unconstitutional discrimination, affirming the current age requirements as constitutional.

The central dispute was whether the age requirements for candidacy under the Public Offices Election Act (25 for the lower house and 30 for the upper house) unconstitutionally infringe upon young adults' right to equality (Article 14), their right to participate in public affairs, and the principle of universal suffrage, especially given the voting age had been lowered to 18.

The case reignited significant public and academic debate on youth political participation in Japan. It highlighted the disparity between the lowered voting age and the unchanged candidacy age, prompting calls for further electoral reforms. Although the lawsuit was dismissed, it energized youth advocacy groups and drew media attention to the issue of generational political representation, contributing to ongoing legislative discussions about potentially lowering the age of eligibility for public office in the future.