It has been 75 years since the Constitution of Japan came into effect on May 3rd.

NHK conducted a poll on the need for constitutional amendment, the impact of the invasion of Ukraine and the prolonged Korona-ka, and awareness of the constitution.

NHK conducted a poll for three days from April 15th, using a method called "RDD" to call landline and mobile phone numbers randomly generated by computers for people aged 18 and over nationwide.


The target was 2978 people, and 50.6%, or 1508 people, responded.

Interest in discussions on constitutional amendments

When asked if they were "interested" in the discussion of constitutional amendment, 16% were "very interested", 49% were "somewhat interested", 27% were "not very interested", and "totally interested". "No" was 7%.

Looking at the comparable results after 2018, "interested" tended to decrease, but this time it turned to increase.

Pros and cons of constitutional amendment

When asked if they think the current constitution needs to be amended, 35% said "I think it needs to be amended", 19% said "I don't think it needs to be amended", and "I can't say either". It was 42%.

The results are almost the same as the survey conducted at the same time last year.

By gender, 45% of men and 25% of women said they needed it.


In addition, females accounted for 51% of the respondents who said "I can't say either", and males accounted for 34%.


"Not necessary" was 19% for men and 18% for women.

Reasons for "necessary" constitutional amendment

When asked why the Constitution needs to be amended, 57% said it was necessary to respond to changes in the security environment surrounding Japan, and the right to self-defense of the country was the highest. 23% said that they should clarify the existence of the Self-Defense Forces and the Self-Defense Forces, 9% said that they should incorporate new rights such as privacy rights and environmental rights, and 6% said that they should have a constitution imposed on the United States. ..

Reasons for "unnecessary" constitutional amendment

When asked why the constitution was "I don't think it was necessary to revise it," 61% said "I want to keep Article 9 of the Constitution, which stipulates the abandonment of war," and "already among the people." "Because it is well established" was 16%, "Because basic human rights are protected" was 15%, and "Because it damages international relations with Asian countries" was 3%.

Pros and cons of amending Article 9 of the Constitution

When asked if they think Article 9 of the Constitution needs to be amended, 31% said "I think it needs to be amended", 30% said "I don't think it needs to be amended", and "I can't say either". It was 34%.

In a survey conducted at the same time last year, "not necessary" was slightly higher than "necessary", but this time, "necessary" increased to the same level as "not necessary". ..

By gender, 42% of men and 20% of women answered "necessary", and 43% of women and 25% of men answered "neither".


"Not necessary" was 30% for both men and women.

Reason for Article 9 Amendment "Necessary"

When asked the reason for those who answered that Article 9 of the Constitution "needs to be amended", "because it should be clearly stated in the Constitution that it has self-defense power" was the most common at 64%, and "centered on the United Nations". 20% said, "Because we should be able to participate in military activities," 8% said, "Because we should make it clear that we will abandon military power including the Self-Defense Forces." "Because it should be" was 4%.

Reason for Article 9 revision "unnecessary"

When asked why Article 9 of the Constitution "doesn't need to be amended", 70% said "because it is the most important article as a peace constitution", and "even if it is not amended, the Constitution" "Because we can respond by changing the interpretation" was 15%, "Because there is no stopping the use of force overseas" was 9%, and "Because it would damage international relations with Asian countries" was 4%.

Evaluation of Article 9 of the Constitution

When asked how to evaluate Article 9 of the Constitution, which stipulates that the war should be abandoned and that it should not have any strength, 23% said it was "very much evaluated", 47% said it was "somewhat evaluated", and "not much evaluated". Was 19%, and "not evaluated at all" was 7%.

By gender, 76% of women and 63% of men answered "evaluate."


33% of men and 17% of women answered that they would not rate.

Did the invasion of Ukraine become constitutionally conscious?

When asked if Russia had become aware of the Constitution following the military invasion of Ukraine, those who answered "became aware" said, "We have no abandonment of war and no force. "Koto" was 71%, "Guarantee of basic human rights" was 69%, and "Freedom of speech and expression, right to know" was 71%.

Among those who answered that they "became aware of the abandonment of war and lack of force" stipulated in Article 9 of the Constitution, those who answered that Article 9 of the Constitution "needs to be amended". 34%, 30% answered that Article 9 of the Constitution "does not need to be amended", and 33% answered "I can't say either".

Do you think the Korona-ka could hurt your freedom and rights?

When asked if they think that the spread of the new coronavirus could impair the freedom and rights of the people guaranteed by the Constitution, they said "I think" (14%) and "I think". "I think" (29%) combined was 42%.


On the other hand, "I don't think" (26%) and "I don't think" (25%) combined "I don't think" was 50%.

Compared to last year's survey at the same time, "I think" increased from 38% to 42%, and "I don't think" decreased from 55% to 50%.

Why freedom and rights were "sometimes impaired"

When asked why they "think" that the freedom and rights of the people guaranteed by the Constitution were sometimes impaired, 28% said "because the freedom of movement and business was restricted", "minimum. "Because there were people who couldn't maintain their lives" was 26%, "Because there were people who couldn't get the necessary medical care" was 22%, and "Because there was discrimination or prejudice against infected people" was 20%.



* Since the survey results are rounded off, the total may not be 100%.


* When summing multiple options, it may not match the total value of% because% is recalculated by adding real numbers.