Japan has officially entered a new chapter in its governmental history. After an intense debate that lasted until the final moments of the parliamentary session, the country has passed a bill establishing a secondary capital.
The decision has become one of the most controversial policies of Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s administration.
The move does not mean Japan is relocating its capital from Tokyo. Instead, the government aims to establish a backup administrative center capable of taking over key state functions if Tokyo is paralyzed by a major earthquake, tsunami, or other national emergency.
The bill was approved by the House of Councillors on Friday, July 24, 2026.
The vote was extremely close, with 123 lawmakers voting in favor and 121 against.
Its passage concluded a week of heated deliberations. The government even extended the parliamentary session by eight days to ensure the legislation could be approved before the 158-day session officially ended on Saturday, July 25, 2026.
Why Does Japan Need a Secondary Capital?
Contrary to widespread assumptions, Japan is not looking for a new capital city.
Under the new law, Tokyo will remain the nation’s capital.
Instead, the government will designate one prefecture outside Tokyo to serve as a backup administrative center capable of assuming part of the government’s functions if the capital becomes incapacitated due to a major natural disaster or national emergency.
The policy stems from concerns over Japan’s high vulnerability to natural disasters.
Located along the Pacific Ring of Fire, Japan is one of the world’s most seismically active countries.
Earthquakes, tsunamis, and typhoons remain constant threats to both daily life and government operations.
In addition to ensuring the continuity of government during emergencies, the secondary capital project is expected to promote more balanced regional development and reduce the country’s economic dependence on Tokyo, which has long served as Japan’s primary economic and administrative hub.
Osaka Emerges as the Leading Candidate but Sparks Controversy
Although the government has yet to officially designate the location of the secondary capital, discussions surrounding the bill have fueled speculation that Osaka is the leading candidate.
That possibility has generated opposition from various groups.
Under the new legislation, any region seeking to become the secondary capital must either have a special administrative structure similar to Tokyo’s 23 special wards or cooperate with a major city within its prefecture.
Many observers argue that this requirement indirectly favors Osaka and paves the way for the Osaka Metropolis Plan, a long-standing proposal by the Japan Innovation Party (JIP) to restructure Osaka’s local government into a system similar to Tokyo’s.
This perception became one of the primary reasons why six opposition parties rejected the bill.
Opposition Says Key Issues Remain Unresolved
Throughout parliamentary deliberations, the six opposition parties consistently opposed the legislation.
They argued that several aspects still required clarification, including a proposal that any referendum on establishing a special administrative district should not be held simultaneously with local elections.
The disagreement even raised the possibility of extending the parliamentary session further and prompted discussions about submitting a no-confidence motion against Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s administration.
Nevertheless, the ruling coalition ultimately secured enough support for the bill to pass.
Is Osaka Really the Best Choice?
Many analysts have questioned the effectiveness of the policy.
If the primary objective is to promote balanced regional development, some experts argue that regions such as Tohoku or Hokuriku, both of which are experiencing population decline, would be more appropriate choices than Osaka.
Others point out that Osaka itself is not entirely free from disaster risks.
The city lies within an area that could be significantly affected by a major Nankai Trough earthquake, raising concerns about whether it could effectively serve as the nation’s administrative center if Tokyo were struck by a major disaster.
There are also concerns that building the infrastructure required for a secondary capital could become subject to political interests while placing additional pressure on the national budget.
Tax Incentives Offered, but Their Effectiveness Is Questioned
The Japanese government has included several incentives in the new law.
Companies that relocate their headquarters or establish branch offices in the designated secondary capital will be eligible for various tax incentives.
The policy is intended to reduce the concentration of economic activity in Tokyo.
However, some economists question whether the incentives will achieve their intended goal.
They argue that advances in technology, particularly artificial intelligence (AI), are likely to make business activities even more concentrated in Tokyo.
Recent data also illustrates the challenge.
Throughout 2025, only 149 companies relocated to Osaka, while 226 companies moved out of the city.
This marked the 44th consecutive year in which Osaka experienced a net loss of companies, with approximately 24.3 percent of those relocating choosing Tokyo as their destination.
Japan Has Relocated Its Capital Several Times Throughout History
The idea of establishing a new administrative center is not new in Japan’s history.
Before Tokyo became the nation’s capital, Japan relocated its seat of government several times.
Nara became Japan’s first capital in 710 AD before the government moved to Nagaoka-kyō in 784 AD.
Shortly afterward, Emperor Kanmu relocated the capital to Kyoto in 794 AD.
Kyoto then served as Japan’s political center and the official residence of the emperor for more than 1,000 years, making it one of the world’s longest-serving capital cities.
A major shift occurred in 1868 during the Meiji Restoration.
Emperor Meiji transferred the seat of government from Kyoto to Edo, a city that had rapidly developed into the country’s commercial and economic center.
Edo was subsequently renamed Tokyo, meaning “Eastern Capital,” and has remained Japan’s capital ever since.
Following the 1995 Kobe earthquake and the 2011 Tohoku earthquake and tsunami, discussions about relocating the capital resurfaced.
However, none of those proposals were ever implemented.
For that reason, the passage of the Secondary Capital Law represents a significant milestone in Japan’s modern history.
Rather than replacing Tokyo, the government has chosen to establish a governmental backup system to ensure the country can continue functioning if the capital is struck by a major disaster or national emergency.
For a nation that constantly lives under the threat of earthquakes, tsunamis, and typhoons, the initiative is viewed as a long-term strategy to ensure the continuity of government during even the most critical situations.
Whether the policy ultimately achieves its objectives or creates new challenges, however, is likely to remain the subject of debate for years to come.***
