Legal Implications of the Japan-EU Strategic Partnership Agreement

Abstract

　The paper analyses legal implications of the Japan-EU Strategic Partnership Agreement （Japan-EU SPA）. The analysis is carried out mainly by way of comparison with other similar SPAs that have been concluded with Korea （Korea-EU Framework Agreement 2010） and Canada （Canada-EU SPA 2016）. One of the common features of the three SPAs is that all emphasize the “shared values” between the three respective countries and the EU, including the principle of democracy, the rule of law, and the respect of human rights and fundamental freedoms. These values are made “essential elements” of each of the SPAs, serious breach of which may trigger unilateral sanctions by the other contracting party. Although the Japan-EU SPA lacks an explicit provision on such unilateral sanctions, this paper argues that the same sanctions could in fact be triggered should the necessity arise. Firstly, the Japan-EU SPA allows the other party to take “other appropriate measures outside the framework of the ［SPA］” （Art. 43（6））. Secondly, the Japan-EU Economic Partnership Agreement, which was concluded in parallel with the SPA, has a general termination clause that does not limit the reasons for termination. When both agreements are applied in combination, it is possible, in practice, for either contracting party to threaten to terminate the economic tie altogether should a very grave and serious breach of the “essential elements” arise. The paper also points out the most significant aspect of the Japan-EU SPA is the institutionalization of regular dialogues between the senior officials of both parties in the form of the Joint Committee, which could decide to add new agenda for cooperation. This is a dynamic element of the SPA, although it could cause a concern over how the Joint Committee could be made accountable to the respective democratic representative institutions, the Japanese Diet and the European Parliament.