If Japan’s politicians can agree on revisions to the constitution, the public will then vote in a national referendum. Polling on the constitution suggests there is greater receptivity across the political spectrum to having a national conversation, but no clear consensus on whether and what to revise.
More than three generations of Japanese have come of age since Emperor Hirohito promulgated the 1947 constitution. The issues that confront the Japanese today are far more complex than those in 1947, when the immediate concerns were the war and the U.S. occupation.
Yet despite political leaders’ interest in constitutional amendment as a means of achieving political and policy reform, Japanese citizens are cautious about changing the document that has protected their postwar democracy.
From 1955 to 1968, the Japanese government conducted regular polling in an effort to gauge how people were responding to their new constitution. The polls presented here represented the transition from upheaval and political contest to the decade of "double-income" growth that created the foundations of today’s Japan. A look back at some of these defining debates over the Japanese constitution in the 1950s helps put today’s conversation in context.
A look back at some of these defining debates over the Japanese constitution in the 1950s helps put today’s conversation in context. The LDP government asked their citizens what they thought about their new constitution. Four findings from these surveys by the cabinet office offer insights on the current debate over constitutional revision.
In 2000, the Lower House Constitutional Research Committee asked the public to share their thoughts on the committee’s work. Out of 212 written responses submitted to the committee, nineteen were selected for publication with the lower house report. The nineteen essays were written by students, teachers, company employees, and homemakers. Overall, they urged Diet members to take their task seriously. Most essays reflected skepticism over the politicians’ motivations rather than concrete suggestions for constitutional revision.
Since the Diet commissions began their work in the early 2000s, Japanese media has become more interested in public attitudes toward revision. On Constitution Day each year, media organizations across the political spectrum have consistently asked their readers about revision. Despite the growing public debate over the constitution, in the absence of a Diet proposal no groundswell of popular support has been forthcoming, making it difficult to predict the outcome of a national referendum.
Polls by the liberal Asahi, the conservative Yomiuri, and the business-oriented Nikkei reveal surprisingly similar long-term trends. There has been no upsurge in support for revision. While roughly half of the respondents are open to change, enthusiasm wanes when Japan’s political leaders have other priorities. For example, when the DPJ took power in 2009, it did not make revision a priority, and polls revealed a drop in public interest. And even those who were disposed to support revision became less enthusiastic after Prime Minister Abe reinterpreted Article 9 in 2014 and the government sponsored new security legislation in 2015.
Thus while political leaders may see the benefit of amending the constitution, the Japanese public is far more skeptical. Even popular leaders, such as Prime Minister Abe, have been unable to move the needle on public opinion when it comes to constitutional revision.
Asahi Shimbun readers are typically cautious on constitutional revision, but their opposition has weakened over the past two years. In May 2020, the gap between those who opposed and those who favored revision shrank to 3 percent, with 46 percent opposed and 43 percent in favor.
The Yomiuri Shimbun itself favors revision of the constitution, having offered its own revision proposals in 1994, 2000, and 2004. People who agree make up slightly more of Yomiuri’s readers than those who don’t, according to a May 2020 poll, though the gap has narrowed in recent years.
The polls by Nikkei Shimbun, Japan’s business daily, show that its readers have wavered in their support for revision. Although over 60 percent supported revision in 2000, only 41 percent did in 2018.
Longer-term trends suggest that the Japanese people are in no hurry to revise their constitution.
Outside Japan, misconceptions about Japan’s constitutional debate abound. Sheila A. Smith, CFR senior fellow for Japan studies, curated a blog series in 2016 on CFR’s Asia Unbound, inviting politicians, scholars, and citizen activists to share their thinking on the prospects for revising Japan’s postwar constitution. The first four responses below are by politicians who have been responsible for drafting their party’s position on the constitution. The next two posts are by scholars, one of diplomatic history and another of constitutional law. The last two posts are by Japanese citizens who played a leading role in movements opposing the Abe cabinet’s efforts to revise the constitution.
Kazuo Aichi led LDP deliberations on constitutional revision throughout his career. Aichi served eight terms in the Diet, and directed the Special Research Commission on the Constitution in the lower house. He retired from the Diet in 2009, but continues to be a revision advocate as secretary-general of the Caucus for a New Japanese Constitution, a cross-party group of legislators led by former Prime Minister Yasuhiro Nakasone.
Hajime Funada has served eleven terms in the lower house starting in 1979, representing the first district constituency of Tochigi Prefecture. He served as chair of the LDP’s Headquarters for the Promotion of Revision to the Constitution and played a central role in the lower house’s commission on the constitution during deliberations on the Abe cabinet’s new security laws.
Natsuo Yamaguchi is the president of Komeito, having served since 2009. He has served two terms in Japan’s lower house and three terms in the upper house. Representative Yamaguchi shares his personal reflections rather than the official view of his party.
Satsuki Eda was the chair of the Democratic Party’s research commission on the constitution. Eda served four terms in the lower house and is currently serving his fourth term in the upper house, representing Okayama Prefecture. In the 1990s Eda left the Socialist Democratic Federation and became associated with the New Frontier Party. He returned to the Diet in 1998 as a member of the Democratic Party of Japan. Throughout his career, Eda has been an influential voice in Diet debate over the reinterpretation and possible revision of Japan’s constitution.
Shinichi Kitaoka, a leading Japanese diplomatic historian, is the president of the Japan International Cooperation Agency. He has led two advisory panels to Prime Minister Abe: the Advisory Panel on Reconstruction of the Legal Basis for Security and the Advisory Panel on the History of the Twentieth Century and on Japan’s Role and the World Order in the Twenty-First Century.
Keigo Komamura, a Japanese constitutional scholar, is professor of law and vice president of Keio University. His most recent publication is an edited volume with Satoshi Machidori, Comparative Politics of Constitutional Revision.
Naomi Takasu is a member of the citizen advocacy group Executive Committee for "The Nobel Peace Prize for Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution." The group aims to promote the pacifist values of Article 9 around the world and petition for a "right to peace" to be added to the UN Charter.
Karin Koretsune is a graduate student at Nihon Joshi Daigaku, the Japan Women’s University, and a member of the Students Emergency Action for Liberal Democracy (SEALDs). SEALDs led large-scale student protests around the country in response to the 2015 security bills. She is the author of Nihon joshidaisei no yononaka wocchi (The world from the vantage point of a women’s college student).