2018 Volume 36 Issue 1 Pages 47-60
It would be fair to argue that compelled commercial speech is generally intended to provide information necessary for our lives and thus will contribute to individual decisions. Such decisions will promote not only the values of self-realization but also those of self-governance, both of which are rationales to ensure freedom of expression, through correcting the defects of the marketplace of ideas by the disclosure of certain useful information. This positive effect will be balanced with the negative one to diminish the extent of autonomy or self-realization of commercial speakers, by which compelled commercial speech is justified constitutionally. What is more, as compelled commercial speech does not completely deprive business entities of the opportunities of expression, the extent of the negative effect will be relatively small. On the other hand, commercial speech restrictions can decrease the extent of self-fulfillment of commercial speakers one-sidedly without the abovementioned positive effect. Therefore, it is easier to testify the validity of compelled commercial speech than that of commercial speech restrictions. It implies that commercial speakers have a limited degree of freedom in selecting commercial information disclosed to the general public as necessary for their lives. This conclusion postulates that the purpose of a compelled commercial speech system is exclusively designed to promote and facilitate commercial transactions, not to compel disclosure of the ideas of commercial speakers. In the latter case, the system may harm not only the freedom of expression but also that of thought and conscience, which is firmly protected under the Constitution of Japan.
