Constitutional amendment "necessary" 35% "not necessary" 19% NHK poll

The 3rd is the Constitution Memorial Day, which is 75 years since the enforcement of the Constitution of Japan.

When asked if they think the current constitution needs to be amended in the NHK poll, 35% said "I think it needs to be amended" and 19% said "I don't think it needs to be amended".

Also, when asked if they think that Article 9 of the Constitution, which stipulates the abandonment of war, needs to be amended, 31% said "I think it needs to be amended" and 30% said "I don't think it needs to be amended". was.

Survey outline

NHK conducted a poll for three days from the 15th of last month using a method called RDD, which calls fixed-line and mobile phone numbers randomly generated by computers for people aged 18 and over nationwide.

The number of people surveyed was 2,978, and 50.6%, or 1,508, responded.

Necessity of constitutional amendment

When asked if they think the current constitution needs to be

amended, ▽ "I think it needs to be amended" is 35%

▽ "I don't think it is necessary to amend" 19%

▽ "I can't say either" Was 42%.

Compared to the survey conducted at the same time last year, the percentages of "need to be revised" and "not necessary to be revised" were almost the same.

Reasons for "need to be revised"

When asked why the Constitution needs to be amended,

57% of the respondents said, "Because it is necessary to respond to changes in the security environment surrounding Japan."

▽ "Self-defense of the country" "Because the existence of rights and the Self-Defense Forces should be clarified" is 23%

▽ "Because new rights such as privacy rights and environmental rights should be included" 9%

▽ "Because it is a constitution imposed on the United States" is 6% bottom.

Reasons for "no revision required"

When asked why the Constitution was "I don't think it was necessary to revise it, "

▽

"I want to keep Article 9 of the Constitution, which stipulates the abandonment of war," was the most common at 61%. "Because

it is firmly established in Japan" was 16%

▽ "Because basic human rights are protected" was 15%

▽ "Because it damages international relations with Asian countries" was 3%.

Necessity of amending Article 9 of the Constitution

When asked if they think Article 9 of the Constitution needs to be

amended, ▽ "I think it needs to be amended" is 31%

▽ "I don't think it is necessary to amend" is 30%

▽ "I can't say either Was 34%.

In a survey conducted at the same time last year, "no need to revise" was slightly higher than "need to revise", but this time it was about the same.

Reasons for Article 9 of the Constitution "Need to be revised"

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%

▽ "UN "Because

we should be able to participate in core military activities" 20%

▽ "Because it should be clear that we will abandon military power including the Self-Defense Forces" 8%

▽ "To be able to use force overseas" "Because it should be" was 4%.

Reason for Article 9 of the Constitution "No revision required"

When asked the reason for those who answered that Article 9 of the Constitution "does not need to be amended",

▽ "Because it is the most important article as a peace constitution" was the most common at 70%

▽ "Even if it is not amended "Because

we can respond by changing the interpretation of the Constitution" was 15%

▽ "Because there is no stopping the use of force overseas" 9%

▽ "Because it damages international relations with Asian countries" was 4%.

* 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.

"Discussion for Constitutional Amendment" Professor Takeshi Inoue, Kwansei Gakuin University

Professor Takeshi Inoue of Kwansei Gakuin University, who specializes in constitutional law and should proceed with discussions on constitutional amendment, said, "I think that more and more people will want to amend Article 9 more prominently due to the military invasion of Ukraine. However, I think this is a sign of the attitude of thinking calmly without being swept away by the situation. "

On top of that, "I saw the invasion by an actual great power and the threat of China, so it may be impossible to keep Article 9 as it is, unlike the premise of 75 years ago. It can be said that some people are aware of it. It is not bad that the pros and cons of the Article 9 amendment are balanced, and we should have a dialogue between them and seek a good direction. " ..

Regarding how to approach the Constitution, which has been in force for 75 years, "There is no other Constitution in the world that has never been amended for 75 years since its enactment, and the values ​​and ways of thinking have changed according to the times. I think many politicians think that if it can be dealt with by changing the constitutional amendment or the constitutional interpretation rather than the difficult constitutional amendment, it is not really good. Always check their constitution. It is necessary to review the constitution and discuss the constitutional amendment from normal times so that we can deal with any situation well. "

“Now we should not change the constitution” Professor Kenji Ishikawa, University of Tokyo

Professor Kenji Ishikawa of the University of Tokyo, who specializes in constitutional law and is in a position that the constitution should not be changed now, said, "I think there will be a flow to amend Article 9 at once from the real fear of the invasion of Ukraine. I thought, but looking at the data, I get the impression that everyone is very calm. "

On top of that, "Article 9 of the Constitution is not a provision prepared as a means for security purposes, but is prepared to address the issue of controlling military power, and ultimately to secure the freedom of the people. The civilized choice not to make a nation for national defense is the Constitution of Japan, especially Article 9, so it is necessary to cherish it and discuss it on that premise. "

Regarding how to deal with the Constitution, which has been 75 years since its enforcement, "It is very important to think about the Constitution over a long period of time without being swayed by immediate problems. As an extension of the idea that it should be realized with a sense, there is a prospect that tyrannical governance may be more efficient. To secure freedom at the turning point of 1975. I think the question is whether or not to maintain a constitutional system. "