I published a book "State's Tort Liability and Conceptual History of Public Power" (2013) and made a presentation, "Modern States, Citizenship, and the Nation: Historical Development of the State Redress System in Japan" at 2013 International Meeting of Law and Society Association in Boston (on May 31. 2013).It seems to me that legal concepts especially in East Asian Law have various origins and therefore they are not always consistent. For example the concept of "administrative action (gyousei-shobun)" in Japan, which is the almost same concept of "exercise of public power", has two origins: "acte administratif" from France and "Verwaltungsakt" from Germany. Today two origins of this concept bring various contradictions to Japanese administrative law. We need to analyze carefully this kind of patchwork legal system

The list of achievements towards the development of human rights indicator is accomplished, inter alia, in the specific areas of right to health and gender. The interest group presentation at the International Human Rights Law Association, which is anticipated to continue on an annual basis, established a solid base for an unremitting collaborative research at the level of academic institute.

While the public utilities have been being privatized in the developed countries, we can find a paradoxical fact that regulations have grown enormously in these countries at the same time. Analyzing the measures of these regulations in these countries shows that the flexible and diverse measures have been taken not only to ensure the fairness of regulations but also prevent governments from obstructing the privatization of public utilities. These flexibility and diversity has demanded the reform of the stiff thinking of the public regulations in the existing administrative law approach. Besides it certainly has introduced a new academic research subject,"the economic administrative law".

The aim of this study is to illustrate the historical development of Japanese administrative litigation and remedy system from a viewpoint of comparative legal history. In this study I analyzed (1) perspectives and methods for historical study in public law, (2) cases and legal theories on tort liability of state and on concept of "administrative action (Gyousei-shobun)" in years 1890-1960, (3) the process of development in the litigation system and theories on economic administrative law and legal remedy in Japan. The results of this study are 10 articles and 4 reports in the academic societies

(1) On the injunction system in the Japanese administrative litigation law I have published an article "Procedural Provisions in the Revised Administrative Litigation Law and the Right of Access to the Courts" (in THE HOURITSU JIHOU vol. 77 No. 3, 2005). And then my study focused on the concept of exercise of public power, which Japanese courts apply in order to exclude injunctions of civil procedure.(2) On the concept of "exercise of public power", I analyzed firstly its historical basis. Articles on this theme are "Tort Liability of the State in the Establishing Era of the Meiji Constitutional System: State Immunity Discipline and the Concept of Public Power(1)-(5)" (in NANZAN LAW REVIEW from vol. 28, No. 4 to vol. 31 No. 3, 2005-7). I gave already a lecture about an outline of these articles were already in a symposium of the Japan Democratic Scientist Society (Division of Law) and summary of this lecture is the article in the journal of this academic society "Science in Law" No. 37. Secondly I examined the concepts of "GYOUSEI-SHOBUN" and "GYOUSEI-KOUI". Both of them mean "administrative action", which is a typical example of "exercise of public power". As a result of my study, I explicated the difference of historical origin of these concepts (former meant originally "administrative measure") and a cause of today's theoretical confusion, which is brought by identifying these two. In other words, because of this confusion Japanese courts deny a series of action for prevention against plane noise, for no other reason than that an action of this kind neither civil nor administrative action.(3) An article on the injunction system in German law will be also appeared in 2006. I examine in this article into the cases and litigation systems of mandamus proceeding or injunction to permitted establishments or facilities, which should pass the criteria in environmental and town planning acts, to non-permitted, which are exempted from regulatory provisions, and to military installations. On the basis of suggestions of these litigation systems, I will propose theoretical and institutional ideas on procedure, object of suit, and effects of judicial decision : I have pointed out a part of these ideas in the Dokkyo International Forum 2005.In addition to these studies from a viewpoint of comparative law, I prepare a Japanese version of H.-J. KOCH (ed.), "UMWELTRECHT" (2002, Luchterhand), which will be published in 2008.(4) In relation to this study theme I have reviewed decisions of courts. Results of this review are reports in THE HOUGAKU SEMINAR since April 2004

1. If administrative bodies would play its role in the social security by means of contract system of civil law, they must introduce not only those systems, in which they support the adequate supply of services by private sectors, supervise the quality of the services and eliminate the barriers against the beneficiary of services, give adequate information about the services, and help the beneficiary of services to bargain with these undertaking bodies, but also those procedural conditions of contracts, which take the characteristics of legal relation in social security into consideration.2. A systematic statute of administrative procedure for social securities should be provided. Following points are elemental : estoppel-principle, notification of the detailed reason for the administrative decisions, inquiry into the matter, factfinding, duty of administrative agencies to advise about remedial procedures and to give information about the administrative decision, adjustment procedure in case of mistake of administrative decision (esp. overpayment of benefits etc.), and the advocate system in these procedures.3. On the judicial reform I came to the following conclusions. (1) Although it is undoubtedly necessary for us to reform social security procedure and process system, questions with regard to this point are ignored in current discussions on judicial reform. (2) In reforming judicial system, we must take the characteristics of social security cases into consideration. (3) From the viewpoint of right to social security, it is very important to introduce a model action system and a wide-range judicial decision system, which is Corresponding to the administrative decisions with a long-term effect, into the Japanese administrative litigation system

The study is to examine the various problems concerning the post-war compensation in general. and the so-called comfort women in partienlar focusing mainly on the relationship between the Republic of Korea and Japan in taking also into the protertion of human rights of Koreans residing in Japan, and to propose the prosped to solve these problems.The research results are as follows :1 The situations surronnding the Japan-Korean relation between 1965 when the Japan-Korean Agreement was concluded and the present have considerably changed : the eitizens of both eountries have established elear historical understandings toward matured civil society, and they have recognized that the solution of the post-war compensation problems is not only related to the Governments of both countries. but also related to the reconciliation and cooperation between the citizens of both countries.2 The problems which "comfort women" have so far suffered were made clear through historical studies and interviews : the true facts and fundamental reasons that "comfort women" problems have been seriously posed to date have been made clear and the daily life security for them is urgently needed.3 After examming eritieally the treaty-making process of the Japan-Korean Agreements of 1965, based mainly on the political and economic factors thereon. it is obvious that problems of compensation of individual persons have not yet solved.4 So far as the legal problems are coneorned, Japanese courts, apart from the Kanpuease, have denied the elaims for compensation on the ground that the statule of limitations can be applied. or the relevant rules of international law which the appheants insoked cannot be applied. We reaxamined these judgments critically from constitutional law, administrative law and international law view points and pointed out that there could be a legal possibility to recognize compensation based on the State responsibity and the enactment of compensation laws is urgently needed in comparing with German precedents.5 Since the solution of post-war compensation at Govermental level has made very slow progress the promotion of exchange at various levels between citizens of our countries for mutual understandings has increasingly become important. Therefore, public opinions of two countries were examined by means of questionnaires.6 Based on the understanding that the Japan-Korean relations has entered into new stage after the Joint Deelaration between our conntries was concluded when Presdent Kim visited Japan in 1998. the problems and prospeets toward the solution of post-war compensation were posed from Korean as well as Japanese partieipants of this study

　 本テーマに関する今年度の研究成果として、 岡田正則「フランス民法典とドイツの国民国家形成」、同 「私権・人権と市民的権利」、同「 国策と裁判所：“行政訴訟の機能不全”の歴史的背景と今後の課題」、同「 社会的ネットワーク論と行政法・地域自治」、OKADA,Masanori, Riskcontrol of Technology in administrative law, in: German-Japanese Conference onNew Technology Governance / 1st September 2018, Saarland Univ.など。

　研究会を6月30日、9月22日、2019年1月12日の３回開催した（早大比較法研究所共同研究「経済行政法理論の比較法的研究」としての研究活動でもある）。研究会では、研究テーマに関し、租税争訟制度、行政法解釈論および司法制度の検討を進めた。主な成果として、岡田正則「私権・人権と市民的権利：フランス革命期の憲法・民法典におけるcivilとcitoyen」」、同「社会的ネットワーク論と行政法・地域自治」、杉原丈史「フランスにおける行政裁判による実効的救済の観点からみた基本的自由保護急速審理の位置づけ(3)」、友岡史仁「事業（規制）法に基づく行政上の諸規制と独禁法の適用関係論再考」など。

2017年度の前半は行政権と司法制度との歴史的な関係を日本の近代化に即して考察を進めた。後半は、マックスプランク研究所主催の「Comparative Workshop onLegal Transformations in 19th and early 20th Century」での報告等の準備を行った。岡田「行政訴訟と司法はどうあるべきか」法と民主主義524号15頁、同「行政訴訟の審理と裁判官の責任」判例時報2351号122-130頁、OKADA, Legal Transformations ofJapanese Public Law in late 19th and early 20th Century: From a Perspective ofAdministrative Litigation Systemなどが主な成果である。

研究会を6月24日、9月16日、12月2日、2月28日の４回開催した（早大比較法研究所共同研究「経済行政法理論の比較法的研究」としての研究活動でもある）。研究会では、研究テーマに関し、環境法制、自治体の監査制度、独立行政機関、法執行手続の面から検討を進めた。主な成果として、岡田正則「原発災害避難住民の「二重の地位」の保障」、田村達久「自治体ガバナンス改革下における自治体監査制度改革の検討」、杉原丈史「フランスにおける行政裁判による実効的救済の観点からみた基本的自由保護急速審理の位置づけ(1-2)」、友岡史仁「日本におけるオープンデータ法制の構築と課題」などがある。

　早大比較法研究所共同研究「経済行政法理論の比較法的研究」の一環としての研究を進めた。今年度は、日米関係が日本の国家および地方自治体レベルの法制度に及ぼす影響とその問題点を分析することに重点を置いた。『世界』掲載の２論文は沖縄県の辺野古新基地建設問題を素材として、また『法と民主主義』掲載論文は神奈川県の厚木基地騒音訴訟等を素材として上記の分析を行った。『法の科学』掲載論文は、法学教育の視点から本研究のテーマに言及した。

@font-face { font-family: "Times";}@font-face { font-family: "ＭＳ 明朝";}@font-face { font-family: "@ＭＳ 明朝";}@font-face { font-family: "平成明朝";}@font-face { font-family: "êÔˇø◊‰ T¿Ù/†°ÖɿT(ˇø0ôÁTƒØD";}@font-face { font-family: "@平成明朝";}p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal { margin: 0mm 0mm 0.0001pt; text-align: justify; font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman"; }div.Section1 { }　研究会を３回開催した（早大比較法研究所共同研究「経済行政法理論の比較法的研究」としての研究活動でもある）。グローバル化現象の法的分析については、岡田「グローバル化と現代行政法」、杉原「難民認定処分の義務付けの訴え」、その国内法（経済規制等）に関わる論点については、友岡「Legal Systems」報告、同「原発「再稼働」にかかる専門的知見の反映」、地方自治との関係については、岡田「裁判所による法治主義・地方自治の破壊」、田村「住民訴訟制度」、杉原「三号請求訴訟の新たな可能性」が成果である。

　本研究は、近年の判決等で流布されている国家無答責の法理に関する実定法説（この法理は1890年の諸立法の前提とされているので実定法上の根拠を有するという説）および「行政裁判法と旧民法が公布された明治23年［1890年］の時点で、公権力行使についての国家無答責の法理を採用するという基本的法政策が確立した」という1890年確立テーゼの真偽を検討するために、関係立法の制定経過、戦前の大審院判例の変遷、および学説の推移を検討した。　結論は次のとおりである。第一に、関係立法における立法者意思、大審院判例の推移、戦前の学説の認識のいずれの面から見ても、国家無答責の法理が1890年の立法措置（行政裁判法16条・裁判所構成法2条および26条・旧民法373条）によって実定法上で確立された法理だということは不可能であること、および、この法理が後年の大審院の判決により形成された判例法理であったこと、は明白である。実定法説が成り立つ余地はない。第二に、同じく戦前の立法・判例・学説のいずれの面からみても、1890年確立テーゼの前提にある認定、すなわち、行政裁判法16条が国に対する損害賠償請求訴訟についての司法裁判所の管轄権を否定したという認定および旧民法373条が「高権的活動に対しては民法に基づく国家責任を否定しようとする立法者意思のあらわれとみることができる」という認定は誤りである。このテーゼは、国家無答責の法理が判例法理として確立されるための制度的基礎を1890年の諸立法が与えた、という限りにおいて妥当性を有する。第三に、国家無答責の法理の適用について、大審院の判決は一貫してはいなかった。「大審院も公務員の違法な公権力の行使に関して、常に国に賠償責任のないことを判示して来た」という認定は誤りである。第四に、国家無答責の法理は、判例法理であるので、国家賠償法附則6項にいう「従前の例」には該当しない。また、その実体的内容は今日の法体系の下ではもはや妥当性を持たないので、現代の裁判所においてこれを適用することは許されない。

　本研究は、行政救済法における「公権力」概念の機能を歴史的脈絡から解明することによって、行政訴訟における差止請求（ひいては抗告訴訟全体）の権利救済上の役割を提示し、最終的には、行政訴訟および民事訴訟における訴訟類型の適用に関する法解釈の指針および訴訟制度改正による解決方向を示すことを目的としている。　2006年度の研究では、戦後改革期における国家賠償制度の創設および行政訴訟制度の再編成（行政裁判所の廃止、行政事件訴訟特例法の制定など）を重点的に検討する計画であったが、まだそれ以前の時期に関する作業が不十分であったため、（１）1890年代の関係立法（裁判所構成法、旧民法・現行民法の不法行為関係規定）の検討、（２）国家賠償責任に関する戦前の大審院判例の変遷の検討、（３）国家賠償責任の成否の鍵となる「公権力」概念のヨーロッパおよび日本での形成過程に関する学説史の検討を進めた。後掲論文「明治憲法体制確立期における国の不法行為責任(3)」が上記（１）に対応する研究成果であり、後掲論文「明治憲法体制確立期における国の不法行為責任(4)」が上記（２）および（３）に対応する研究成果であり、後掲論文「日本における行政救済制度の形成史と理論的課題」が上記（３）と戦後改革期の検討に対応する研究成果である。　なお、論文「明治憲法体制確立期における国の不法行為責任」は今年度中に完結させる予定であったが、「(4)」の分量が大部になったため、これを二分し、後半を「（5・完）」として来年度に公表することとした。この論文によって、日本における国家賠償制度史・理論史研究の欠落を埋めることができ、行政訴訟・民事訴訟を含めた解釈論・立法論の指針を提供できるものと自負している。