The headline from Japan is centered around the national review of Supreme Court judges, examining who these individuals essentially are. An integral part of the Japanese constitution, this review allows citizens to scrutinize the performance and integrity of sitting Supreme Court justices. The timeliness of this event suggests it might be occurring during a general or local election, as they're typically held simultaneously.

In Japan, this event is highly regarded as it embodies their belief in democracy and transparency in the judicial system. It's a time when Japanese citizens exercise their constitutional right to approve or disapprove of Supreme Court judges, making the exercise equally significant for the judges as well. This process not only holds the judges accountable but also strengthens public trust in the legal system.

Similar to certain elements within the US system, Japanese citizens can voice their opinions on their Supreme Court judges. However, unlike in the U.S., where Supreme Court justices are appointed for a lifetime term, in Japan, they're up for public approval or disapproval after every general election. This mechanism of approval is unique to Japan and different from the US or the EU where justices are usually appointed by the president or by an appointments commission respectively.