Constitution Day: Deepen Discussions in Light of Global Turmoil / Flood of False Info Also Should Be Tackled Urgently

Editorial

16:15 JST, May 3, 2026

The postwar international order based on multilateral cooperation and free trade is on the verge of collapse. People now live in an era where merely advocating for peace is no longer enough to protect their nation’s security.

It is the duty of politics to bring the supreme law in line with the times to tackle new challenges.

It has been 79 years since the Constitution came into effect. Japan has enjoyed peace and successfully achieved economic development after the end of World War II. It goes without saying that the pacifist Constitution has served as the foundation for this.

Universal principles — popular sovereignty, respect for fundamental human rights, and pacifism — must continue to be upheld.

Drafting specific text for articles essential

At the same time, it is also a fact that the current Constitution has failed to keep up with the times.

The ruling and opposition parties should first draft specific text for articles to amend the Constitution and hold discussions based on these drafts. This is likely to allow the points that need to be amended to be clarified.

The preamble to the Constitution states that the people of Japan have determined to preserve the nation’s security, “trusting in the justice and faith of the peace-loving peoples of the world.” However, permanent members of the U.N. Security Council — countries that should bear responsibility for world peace — are now threatening peace.

Russia has continued its aggression against Ukraine for more than four years. The United States has also disregarded international law by launching attacks on Iran. China is stepping up pressure on neighboring countries and regions by wielding its economic and military power.

The principle of the preamble — that the Japanese people place trust in other nations — does not hold true anymore.

The era in which Japan relies on the United States for security and maintains the Self-Defense Forces at a minimum level of capability is over. Discussions on the Constitution are essential also from the standpoint of what role Japan should play in protecting the security of the entire Asian region.

The Liberal Democratic Party has proposed maintaining Article 9 and creating a new clause called “Article 9-2” to explicitly mention the SDF.

However, the Japan Innovation Party and the Democratic Party for the People have argued that just stipulating the existence of the SDF could leave constraints on the exercise of the right to self-defense. Given that, these parties have called for deleting a provision in Paragraph 2 of Article 9 that bans Japan from maintaining “war potential,” and to explicitly reference the right to self-defense.

Debate on amending Article 9 has been on the wane lately, but this is an issue that should not be put off.

As for lawsuits concerning disparities in the value of votes in national elections in recent years, the judiciary has interpreted equality under the law as equality in the value of votes and has called on the Diet to correct these disparities.

Based on these judicial decisions, the ruling and opposition parties have reduced the number of regional electoral constituencies in the House of Representatives. In the House of Councillors, electoral districts in prefectures that neighbor each other were merged to create the Tottori-Shimane and Tokushima-Kochi constituencies.

Regional voices disregarded?

If people continue to leave regional areas, there will be no choice but to further cut the number of lawmakers elected from these regions. Is it truly appropriate to determine electoral zoning based on population ratios?

The upper house’s Commission on the Constitution has been discussing a proposal to define upper house members as “regional representatives” under the Constitution and to eliminate the merged constituencies. This proposal is aimed at establishing a basis for electing at least one representative from each prefecture, thereby making it harder to challenge the equality of voting value.

From the perspective of placing importance on regional areas, designating upper house members as regional representatives is one viable option. This move could also serve to strengthen regional cohesion, including in depopulated areas.

The Constitution states that matters concerning elections shall be “fixed by law,” leaving them to the discretion of the Diet. It is difficult to dispel the feeling that it is strange for the judiciary to make demands to the Diet regarding electoral rezoning from the standpoint of constitutionality.

Meanwhile, the lower house’s Commission on the Constitution has made the creation of an emergency provision its immediate primary focus. In the wake of the Great East Japan Earthquake, some elections, including a gubernatorial race, could not be held in disaster-stricken areas, so terms in office were extended through special measures legislation. The terms for Diet members are stipulated in the Constitution. It would be understandable to amend the Constitution for the purpose of allowing their terms to be extended in the event of an emergency.

Dealing with a digital society is also an urgent task. There is a flood of disinformation and misinformation on social media, impacting election results. There are also cautious views regarding the regulation of social media, citing concerns that it could infringe upon freedom of expression.

Freedom of expression is guaranteed under the Constitution because it is important to form public opinion through free discussions by the people — free speech is therefore essential to democracy. Public opinion can only be shaped in an environment where individuals can have access to various information and organize their thoughts.

Unforeseen digital society

However, social media platforms are designed to prioritize the display of sensational content and posts tailored to individual users’ preferences and other factors. As a result, the veracity of social media posts becomes a secondary priority. Furthermore, users tend to be surrounded by posts that reflect opinions similar to their own.

Such a system could distort the formation of public opinion by depriving people of opportunities to encounter diverse viewpoints.

Even the current Constitution stipulates that various rights must not be abused, including freedom of expression, and that these rights are also subject to restrictions for the sake of “public welfare.” It would be a case of mistaken priorities if democracy were undermined by leaving problems such as disinformation and misinformation unresolved in the name of freedom of expression.

 (From The Yomiuri Shimbun, May 3, 2026)