(Yomiuri: March 23, 2015—p. 1, p. 9)

 The Yomiuri Shimbun conducted a mail-in public opinion survey across the nation to probe public attitudes on the Constitution of Japan. In the survey, respondents were asked whether they think the nation’s postwar constitution should be amended. In the breakdown of answers to this question, affirmative answers outnumbered negative ones, with “yes” accounting for a total of 51% and “no” for a total of 46%.

 In July last year, the government made a cabinet decision to review its conventional interpretation of the Constitution. With this constitutional reinterpretation, Japan is now allowed to exercise its right of collective self-defense to the minimum extent necessary. In the survey, respondents were asked whether they approve of this cabinet decision. In response to this question, “yes” accounted for a total of 53% and “no” for a total of 45%. In a previous telephone-based spot survey conducted shortly after the cabinet decision was made last year, those approving of the cabinet decision accounted for a total of 36%. The results of previous polls and the one taken this time around cannot be compared directly due to different polling methodologies. However, the public now seems to have a better understanding of the matter through such occasions as Diet discussions thereafter.

 In the survey, respondents were asked what to do about the Constitution’s Article 9, which stipulates that Japan and its people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes. To this question, a total of 40% said “Article 9 should be left intact as is but should be flexibly interpreted or implemented” in dealing with constitutional issues relating to the article. This answer topped all other answers. Among other answers, a total of 35% said “Article 9 should be amended because dealing with such issues by flexibly interpreting or implementing it has now reached its limits,” with a total of 20% saying “Article 9 should be strictly adhered to without any changes to its conventional interpretation or implementation in dealing with such issues.”

 Respondents were also asked, with multiple answers allowed, what they think should be amended in the Constitution or added to it. In the breakdown of answers to this question, a total of 44% said the Constitution should mandate the state to “maintain sound finances,” topping all other answers, followed by a total of 39% saying the Constitution should allow Japan to “maintain armed forces for self-defense,” 32% saying the Constitution should “guarantee the right of the nation’s people to live in a favorable environment,” and 30% saying the Constitution should “define the national and local governments’ respective roles.”

 Meanwhile, in order for the Diet to initiate amendments to the Constitution, Article 96 of Constitution currently requires “a concurring vote of two-thirds or more” of all the members of the House of Councillors and the House of Representatives. Asked about this requirement, a total of 53%, more than half of the respondents, said it should be left intact as is.

 The survey was implemented from late January through late February.

 72% “hope for animated debate”

 In the Yomiuri Shimbun’s latest nationwide public opinion survey on the Constitution of Japan, half of the respondents favored amending it, with a total of 70% calling for all political parties to engage in animated debate on the Constitution in the Diet. The public now has a better understanding of the government’s constitutional reinterpretation allowing Japan to exercise its right of collective self-defense within a limited scope. On the other hand, however, the public remains cautious about amending Article 9. The ruling Liberal Democratic Party of Japan wants the Commission on the Constitution in both houses of the Diet to begin concentrating on specific amendments to the Constitution during the current Diet session. However, it’s necessary to deepen the public’s understanding through Diet discussions. (Abridged)

 Questions & answers (%)

Q: What aspects of the Constitution of Japan are you interested in? If there are any aspects you are particularly interested in, pick as many as you like from among those listed below.

Q: Do you think the Constitution should be amended?

Q: (Only for those who answered “yes” to the foregoing question) Why? Pick as many reasons as you like from among those listed below.

Q: (Only for those who answered "no" to the foregoing question) Why? Pick as many reasons as you like from among those listed below.

Q: Article 9 of the Constitution stipulates Japan’s renunciation of war and prohibits its maintenance of war potential. The government has so far interpreted or implemented its provisions in a flexible way to address relevant issues. What do you think the government should do about Article 9 from now? Pick only one from among those listed below.

Q: The Constitution’s Article 9 has two paragraphs. The first paragraph stipulates Japan’s renunciation of war. Do you think this paragraph should be amended?

Q: The second paragraph in Article 9 stipulates that Japan will not maintain war potential. Do you think this paragraph should be amended?

 Q: The next question concerns the “right of collective self-defense,” or in other words, the right to launch a counterattack on a country, if and when this country has launched an armed attack on another country that is closely related to Japan, while regarding this armed attack as an attack on Japan. The government has reviewed its conventional interpretation of the Constitution and made a cabinet decision that allows Japan to use its right of collective self-defense to the minimum extent necessary if and when there is an obvious danger that could undermine the people’s rights. Do you approve of this?

 Q: (Only for those who answered “no” to the foregoing question) What’s the primary reason? Pick only one.

 Q: The government used to create a special law for its each overseas dispatch of troops from the Self-Defense Forces over a long period of time for activities abroad other than participation in United Nations peacekeeping operations. Do you think the government, in order to change this, should create a new law, a so-called permanent law, which stipulates comprehensive rules for Japan to dispatch the SDF overseas?

 Q: Article 96 of the Constitution requires a concurring vote of two-thirds or more of all the members of the House of Representatives and the House of Councillors in order for the Diet to initiate amendments to the Constitution and submit these amendments to the people for ratification. In this regard, there’s an opinion saying this requirement should be changed to a concurring vote of more than half of all the members of each house so the Diet can facilitate its submission to the people of amendments to the Constitution. Pick only one that is close to your thinking about revising Article 96.

 Q: Article 59 of the Constitution stipulates that a bill which is passed by the House of Representatives, even if it’s voted down in the House of Councillors, becomes law when passed a second time by the House of Representatives by a majority of two-thirds or more of the members present. In this regard, there’s an opinion saying this article should be revised so a bill can become a law when passed a second time by a concurring vote of more than half of the members of the House of Representatives. Which of the following opinions is close to your opinion? Pick only one.

 Q: Concerning “the disparity in the relative weight of a vote” for the House of Representatives and the House of Councillors, the Supreme Court has ruled that the last two elections for both houses were in a state of unconstitutionality. If “the disparity in the relative weight of a vote” for the House of Representatives and the House of Councillors is rectified, there will be an increase in the number of lawmakers elected from urban districts and a decrease in the number of those elected from rural districts. In this regard, which of the following opinions is close to your thinking? Pick only one.

 Q: In Japan, the prime minister may dissolve the House of Representatives for a general election if the prime minister judges it’s necessary to do so. In this regard, which of the following opinions is close to your thinking? Pick only one.

 Q: The government’s responsibility and authority in the event of major disasters and other emergencies are not stipulated in the Constitution but are stipulated in specific laws. In this regard, which of the following opinions is close to your thinking? Pick only one.

Q: If there’s anything you think should be revised in the Constitution or should be added to the Constitution, pick as many as you like from among those listed below.

 Q: Do you think the political parties should have even more animated discussions on the Constitution?

 Q: The Diet has set up a Commission on the Constitution in each of its lower and upper chambers to submit draft amendments to the Constitution. What do you think the commission in each house should discuss on a priority basis? Pick up to three from among those listed below.

 Polling methodology: The survey was implemented on a mail-in basis, with a total of 3,000 persons chosen from among all eligible voters throughout the country (at 250 locations on a stratified two-stage random-sampling basis). The questionnaire was sent out on Jan. 28 to those chosen for the survey and was sent back from 1,977 persons by Feb. 28. Valid answers were obtained from 1,927 persons (64%), excluding answers from those not subject to the survey.

 Breakdown of respondents: Male—48%, female—52%; persons in their 20s—10%, 30s—15%, 40s—18%, 50s—18%, 60s—21%, 70 and over—18%.

 Note: Figures rounded off. The total percentage of numerical values in graphs and tables may not add up to 100%. “0” indicates that the figure was below 0.5%.