Amendment to the Constitution 32% No 24% NHK Public Opinion Poll May 2 17:50

According to NHK's opinion poll, whether or not they think that the current constitution needs to be amended, 32% of the respondents answered, "I think it needs to amend." I don't think so "was 24%. When asked whether they would need to revise Article 9 of the Constitution, which stipulates the abandonment of war, or did not think that it was necessary, 26% of the respondents answered "I think it is necessary" and 37 answered "I don't need it" %was.

NHK conducted polls for 3 days from the 3rd of last month using RDD to call fixed and mobile phone numbers randomly generated by computer, and out of 2681 men and women aged 18 and over nationwide. , 58.2% or 1560 people answered.

When asked if they think it is necessary to revise the current constitution or do they need to revise it,
▽ "I think it needs to be revised" is 32%,
▽ "I do not need to revise" Was 24%, and
▽ “I can't say either” was 41%.

According to an adult survey conducted using the same method,
of respondents "I think it is necessary" and 27% were "I don't need it." “I think” exceeded “I don't need it”.

Reason for coming

When I asked the person who answered "I think it needs to be revised", the reason was "it is necessary to respond to the changes in the security environment surrounding Japan" with 50%, the most "the national self-defense right and the SDF "Because the existence should be clarified" was 25%, "Because new rights such as privacy and environmental rights should be incorporated" was 11%, and "Because the constitution was imposed on the United States" was 10%.

When I asked the person who replied, "I don't think that it needs to be revised," 62% said that "I want to keep Article 9 of the Constitution that stipulates the abandonment of war." Kara ”is 17%,“ Because it is already established in the people ”is 14%, and“ Because it impairs international relations with Asian countries ”is 3%.

Pros and Cons of Article 9 Amendment

When asked about Article 9 of the Constitution, which stipulates that the war is abandoned and that it has no power,
▽ "I think it needs to be revised" is 26%,
▽ "I do not need to revise" 37%,
▽ 32% of respondents said "I can't say either" and "
I don't need it" exceeded "I need it".

When asked about how to evaluate Article 9 of the Constitution,
▽ "Very evaluated" was 27%,
▽ "Evaluated to some extent" was 48%, and
those who "evaluated" were 75% in total.
On the other hand,
▽ "Not very evaluated" was 15%,
▽ "Not evaluated at all" was 5%.

Expert "Legal response should be legal"

Kenji Ishikawa, a professor at the University of Tokyo, who should not change the constitution now, said, "Some people think that the lack of the government's infection control measures against the new coronavirus is due to the constitution. Therefore, it is necessary to separate the two aspects of responding to emergencies and establishing an "emergency clause" in the Constitution, so the Cabinet will decide to skip the parliament and decide arbitrarily. It is dangerous to prepare a mechanism that can be dealt with. The emergency should be dealt with by law, and it is different from linking it to the theory of constitutional revision. "
On the other hand, regarding Article 9 of the Constitution, he said, "The role is being evaluated again. It can be seen that the momentum of the Article 9" Kacon "draft that clearly states the existence of the Self-Defense Forces is receding."

Expert "Discussion including revision from normal times"

Takeshi Inoue, a professor at Kwansei Gakuin University, who is in the position of discussing the revision of the constitution, said, `` Increasing numbers of people are skeptical that the current constitution cannot adequately respond to the problem of the new coronavirus. The main premise is to find out what can be dealt with by law, but there are things that can not be dealt with alone. I think that sudden discussion is very dangerous, so After the problem of the new coronavirus is over, I think we should calmly discuss peace of mind and emergency preparations, including the revision of the constitution. "
On the other hand, regarding Article 9 of the Constitution, some say that "the principle of pacifism pervades the people widely, but there is a gap in reality from the Constitution. Such opinions should be collected and discussed." .