People Don’t Want Immediate Constitutional Amendment

May 3rd marked the 79th Constitution Day, since the Constitution of Japan was enforced on this day in 1947. Current polls shows that majority of the people in Japan approve constitutional amendment, while most people are negative against immediate change of provision of the constitution. In the world with consecutive military conflicts, on which Japanese people have a concern to be entangled with, some people reaffirm the value of pacifism written in the constitution.

On necessity of constitutional amendment, the majority realizes that the constitution should be changed. In the poll of Kyodo News Agency, 69 percent of the respondents saw necessity of the amendment, while 31 percent did not. Yomiuri Shimbun reported 57 percent of approval on the same question with 40 percent of denial. Asahi Shimbun recognized the same trend with 49 percent and 44 percent.

 

However, the answers on when the amendment would be made showed a contradictory trend. 53 percent did not think that the Diet should hurry up the amendment, while 46 percent did, in the poll of Kyodo. Asahi found that 62 percent did not hope it accelerated, as 33 percent of respondents wanted it soon. The ratio of the people who do not want immediate amendment was increased from previous polls. Those polls proved that majority of people rather want further detailed discussion on the amendment in the Diet than immediate change of the constitution.

 

It was remarkable that Asahi poll showed that the people are divided on whether the amendment should be made by Sanae Takaichi administration. As 47 percent approved it, 

43 percent did not. Although Takaichi identifies herself as a promoter of constitutional amendment, some people dismiss her leadership on this issue, even though they think the amendment is necessary.

 

The agreement by the Liberal Democratic Party and Japan Innovation Party on forming a coalition last October includes amendment of Article 9 of the constitution. But Yomiuri poll showed a relative reluctancy in changing Article 9. 80 percent answered that the first paragraph of Article 9 should not be changed. And 48 percent thought the same on Paragraph 2, slightly exceeding the ones who hoped a change with 47 percent.

 

Takaichi unintentionally proved a significant value of Article 9 in her diplomacy. In the summit meeting with U.S. President Donald Trump on March 19 in the White House, Takaichi explained that Japan has a legal restraint for sending its self-defense force to the Strait of Hormuz. Trump acknowledged that the restraint was Article 9 of the Constitution of Japan. Article 9 effectively defended the self-defense force from pressure of Trump to send troops to support the U.S., the option which is highly unpopular for Japanese people.

 

Recognizing the pacifist constitution as forced by the U.S., hawkish lawmakers are hastened to change any part of the constitution as soon as possible. However, Article 99 of the constitution provides that the Emperor and any public officers have an obligation to respect and uphold this constitution. No attitude to respect the constitution can be seen in current Diet discussion on constitution, in which an amendment is premised.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

LDP Kickoffs Presidential Election

Contaminated Soil to Prime Minister’s Residence

Defense Ministers Meet in Seoul