抄録
This article considers the problem of the deregulation of the activities of lawyers, which takes an important part in the judicial reform that is now proposed in Japan. We first compare the basic ideas that either promote or restrain the deregulation of the activities of lawyers. The argument for deregulation supports the view on judicial process based on the autonomous law, and value-neutral and technical legal practice, while the argument that restrains deregulation argues for the responsive law and expects more active roles of lawyers based on the legal principles for extending public goods. By comparing these two conflicting views from historical perspective of legal ideas, we show that the basic idea of "the rule of law" now has two diversified implications. We next discuss that the increase of the population of lawyers is required at the present situation of Japanese legal system, without depending on the idea on legal practice that is relied on, since it is necessary to meet both the needs of profit-seeking firms and those of citizens who require the help of lawyers for their legal right. We finally argue that the use of the market mechanism for the allocation of legal activities is both necessary and effective for establishing the rule of law in Japan, as long as it is complemented with reasonable regulations of the market and appropriate public legal aids toward judicial activities of citizens.
