Senior LDP Lawmaker Eyes Constitutional Referendum Within One Year

Japan's long-stalled push to revise its constitution is gaining fresh momentum under the current administration, with Keiji Furuya, a senior ruling Liberal Democratic Party lawmaker, saying he hopes a national referendum can be held "within a year."

Four main items are currently on the agenda: education-related revisions, emergency provisions to maintain Diet functions during major crises, electoral district reform, and changes related to Article 9, the postwar pacifist clause that renounces war and bars the country from maintaining war potential.

Furuya, who chairs the Lower House Commission on the Constitution, acknowledged that major hurdles remain, with differences still unresolved within and across party lines. But in an interview with Japan Forward, he said constitutional revision is a matter of sovereignty and that pro-revision forces are within reach of the two-thirds majority required in both chambers of the Diet.

Excerpts from the interview follow.

Why is there a strong push now to revise the post-war constitution?

Updating a constitution to reflect the times is the global standard. It is common sense around the world. Our postwar Constitution was drafted before the country had even recovered its sovereignty, so this is a task Japan has been destined to confront.

Take, for example, the proposed emergency clause. If you look at countries around the world, 95% of those that have adopted or amended their constitutions since 1990 have similar emergency provisions. Among newly established countries, the figure is 100%. But Japan's Constitution has no such clause, precisely because it was written at a time when Japan lacked sovereignty.

Ultimately, whether to amend the constitution will be decided by a majority vote in a national referendum. Right now, the Japanese people—who are the sovereign authority—are being robbed of the chance to make their own decision. That, I believe, amounts to a dereliction of duty by the legislature.

Article 9 remains the most contentious issue. What would a revision actually look like?

Starting the debate with Article 9 would be risky. What we need first is for the public to understand that constitutions sometimes have to be changed to reflect the needs of the times and to correct their defects.

The first paragraph of Article 9 is universal. It renounces the use of force as a means of settling international disputes. I believe that is a provision Japan can be proud of before the world. Whatever proposal we put forward, we have always been clear that this principle must be preserved.

At the same time, if the Self-Defense Forces are clearly written into the Constitution, then at the very least, people will no longer be able to claim that their existence conflicts with the Constitution.

Why is legal recognition of the Self-Defense Forces so important?

There are about 250 constitutional scholars in Japan today, and roughly 70% of them say the Self-Defense Forces may be unconstitutional. Seven of Japan's eight textbook publishers also state in their textbooks that the SDF may be unconstitutional.

Japan has about 250,000 SDF personnel, plus another 50,000 reservists. That makes 300,000 people. Many of them have children. And those children study from textbooks that, in effect, tell them their parents are engaged in unconstitutional work. That is something we simply cannot leave as it is.

Senior members of the ruling and opposition parties attend an informal meeting of the Lower House Commission on the Constitution at the National Diet building on April 7. Keiji Furuya, the commission's chairman, is seated at the center. (©Sankei/Ataru Haruna)

To initiate an amendment, a two-thirds majority is required in both chambers of the Diet, which the ruling bloc holds in the Lower House but not in the Upper House. Do you believe the necessary votes can be secured?

To secure a two-thirds majority in the Upper House, we need at least 166 votes. The ruling LDP currently has 101 seats, and our coalition partner, Ishin no Kai, has 19. If we add the Democratic Party for the People with 25 seats, Sanseito with 15, the Conservative Party of Japan with two, Team Mirai with two, and three unaffiliated members, the total comes to 167.

There are six unaffiliated members in the chamber, and I know three of them are for constitutional revision.

So even without waiting for the next Upper House election [in July 2028], we should be able to initiate a constitutional amendment in both chambers. I hope to bring it to a national referendum within a year.

Critics have argued that constitutional revision would mark a return to Japan's militaristic past. What is your response?

The only countries that complain Japan is returning to militarism or becoming capable of waging war are China and South Korea. Yet even China and South Korea have amended their constitution several times.

Throughout the postwar period, our country has remained committed to what former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe described as a proactive contribution to peace. We have not fired a single shot at another country, and that is an enduring principle. What matters is that Japan puts in place the necessary arrangements and safeguards to defend its own sovereignty. That is the kind of country we should become.

At the same time, as Japan moves toward constitutional revision, it will be essential to more actively explain our position to the international community.

Author: Kenji Yoshida