Constitution experts oppose revision of Article 9

The House of Representatives Constitution Research Council held its first central public hearing from May 12 to 13. As was the case with the preceding nine local public hearings, a majority of speakers said they are opposed to an adverse revision of the war-renouncing Article 9.

Based on her experience as Japan's U.N. disarmament ambassador, Sophia University professor Inoguchi Kuniko said, "Other countries listen to Japan when calling for disarmament and non-proliferation not only because Japan is an atomic-bombed country but also because it has been true to its Constitution since the end of WW II."

Oguma Eiji, assistant professor at Keio University, stated, "It is irrational to insist on the need for Japan to establish a constitution on its own on the grounds that the current Constitution was imposed by the United States. Such an argument could conversely strengthen Japan's subordination to the U.S. and offend the sensibilities of other East Asia countries."

Tokyo University Professor Funabiki Takeo said that although a revision of Article 9 enables the Constitution to be consistent with the reality of Japan having the Self-Defense Forces, it will not match the world in the future. "The world is catching up with Japan because it is becoming harder to conduct wars in the world. To revise Article 9 in such a situation is not a far-sighted plan," he said. (end)