Leaning on Amendment Again

It is highly unusual for a Prime Minister of Japan, whose status is endorsed by Constitution of Japan, to insist on amending provisions of the Constitution. Prime Minister Shinzo Abe repeatedly showed his eagerness to amend the Constitution in the discussion of the Diet. On the most controversial Article 9, Abe has been ambivalent on determining his stance. After all, he looks to be supportive for any changes available.

Interpreting his words, Abe seemed to like to have Japanese Force, not satisfied with self-defense force. “There is an argument that the situation, in which seventy percent of constitutional scholars suspect self-defense force to be unconstitutional, should be eliminated,” told Abe in the discussion in Budget Committee of House of Representatives on Wednesday. He indicated that the Article 9 had to be amended, because self-defense force had been unconstitutional, in spite of official interpretation that SDF was constitutional as minimum force for defending the nation.

Section 2 of Article 9 determines that land, sea and air forces, as well as other war potentials, will never be maintained. The draft of new constitution made by Liberal Democratic Party in 2012 requires National Defense Force headed by Prime Minister for maintaining peace and independence and protecting the nation. “Leaving obsolete Section 2 of Article 9 untouched,” told Chairwoman of LDP Policy Research Council, Tomomi Inada, “makes constitutionalism nominal.”

Followed by such conservative power as Inada, Abe proceeds to create an environment for constitutional amendment. For him, it was irresponsible for politics not to take initiative for constitutional amendment. Abe thinks that most people in Japan want to change their constitution and he is responsible for making it happen. Historiography of LDP has been that Constitution of Japan was posed by occupation force of United Nations and the Japanese need to have their own.

On the other hand, Abe admits that changing Article 9 has not received enough support from the public. It was based on the notion that the coalition partner Komeito embraced overwhelming opposition against changing Article 9. Constitution of Japan is obsolete, amendment is one of the biggest issues for coming election of House of Councillors, but changing Article 9 is still not realistic. Those are what Abe understands so far.

There is confusion. Constitutionalism is a concept stemming from rule of law. Amending constitution with unilateral idea that the constitution became obsolete would not be interpreted as constitutionalism. If an administration thinks that rule of Emperor should be resumed in the future, it will be possible in the reasoning of Abe. There is no sign of emergency for Japan to have mightier force to defend itself.