Japanese political parties hold vastly different positions on constitutional revision
On April 15, the Japanese House of Councillors convened the first session of the constitutional review committee during this parliamentary term. Each faction delivered statements within a five-minute time limit, once again highlighting the divergent stances among political parties regarding constitutional revision.
Yusuke Nakanishi, a member of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), emphasized that a draft framework for constitutional amendments has already been prepared, focusing on four key areas: clarifying the status of the Self-Defense Forces, responding to emergency situations, abolishing district consolidation, and enhancing education.
Yūkō Oyama, a member of the Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan (CDP), reiterated his party's position, stating, “We will advance efforts to protect and effectively utilize the Constitution based on constitutionalism, using rational and principled discourse.”
He also criticized Prime Minister Kōshi Takaichi’s remarks at the LDP convention, where she claimed “the time for constitutional revision has come,” calling them “deceptive statements that presuppose revision and mislead the public.”
Furthermore, regarding Prime Minister Takaichi’s assertion that “the Constitution is a vehicle for depicting the kind of nation we wish to build and presenting an ideal form,” Oyama pointed out that such a view contradicts the core principle of modern constitutionalism, which holds that “the essence of the Constitution lies in limiting state power.”
He added that these remarks completely ignore the normative significance—rooted in constitutionalism—that the Peace Clause (Article 9) and the Preamble of the Constitution, as its legal foundation, embody in restraining state power through pacifism. He explicitly opposed revising Article 9 and also rejected establishing a drafting committee for such a purpose.
The Communist Party of Japan and Reiwa Shinsengumi also oppose constitutional revision.
On the other hand, the Komeito Party stated that “it is time to re-examine the Constitution” and expressed a proactive stance toward revision; the Party of Hope advocated for “constitutional addition” by introducing necessary new provisions; while the Party of the People called for a complete “constitutional overhaul” through “reconstitution.” Even among parties supporting constitutional revision, their differing positions were once again clearly evident.
Original source: toutiao.com/article/1862553095190665/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author.