日本公文書管理法於2009年正式獲得通過。自此，日本政府依該法之規範，被課以公共記錄之責。也就是說，此後行政機關即需對文書之作成、整理、保存、移管乃至廢棄等各階段，皆予以妥適之管理與處置；在此同時，民眾亦得依該法，對這些文書與資訊，進行主體性的利用。質言之，公文書除代表了某種歷史事實的記錄，更是民眾對政府施政與決策，施以回溯性檢證時不可或缺的工具。有鑑於該制度之重要性，本文嘗試透過制度解釋（institutionalist accounts）途徑，來對日本公文書管理的制度結構進行分析，並冀盼從中汲取本土制度可能的啟示。分析後發現，日本制度將「公文書管理」視為落實民主課責的機制。問題是，倘若過於偏重監督與課責的面向，往往導致記錄過於細瑣，從而有礙於機關核心業務的推動與優質公共服務提供的價值實現。是以本文認為，考慮到當代政府運作與決策過程的繁複性，給予行政機關若干裁量空間，實有必要。日本經驗對於我國的啟示在於，有鑑於我國尚未建置起一套完整的公文書管理體系，儘速展開制度性討論與對話，實有一定的急迫性與必要性。對此，本文指出公文書管理制度建置與運作時最大的挑戰，在於必須在各項民主價值間求取平衡。在找尋此一平衡點的過程中，各項討論務需從實務的角度出發，而非僅從抽象規範層次進行論證。

In 2009, the Public Records and Archives Management Act (Act No. 66 of 2009) was passed in Japan. Under this Act, the Japanese government is required to prepare, manage, and then preserve detailed documents as public records and, in turn, it also provides access to the Japanese citizens to the governmental information. With these public records, citizens can easily inquire into and logically observe government’s decision-making processes. This article closely scrutinizes the structure, principles, limitations of the Pubic Records and Archives Management Act. It is argued that, as a fundamental part of the access-to-information system, this Act provides an efficient way to hold the government accountable. Having said that, however, its limitations are somehow straightforward. There is increasing recognition of the complexity of decision-making and service delivery. Keeping a full, or even detailed, record for every single decision-making step is by no means easy, if not impossible. Some discretion for the government, the author argues, is still needed. Given that Taiwan is still in the very process of establishing a system of public records, it is imperative to start pragmatic discussions. In the end, striking a right balance between democratic values is the most important, but also the hardest, part in the making of a fully functional system.