authority of the emperor, whereas the Constitution unduly emphasizes protecting the
rights of the individual without due regard to the public welfare and public obligation
to society and to others. In short, the LDP does not embrace modern constitutional-
ism; thus it is no exaggeration to say that if there were an enemy of democracy and
freedom in postwar Japan, it would be the LDP itself.^4
In 1956 , the LDP government submitted a bill to establish a constitutional
commission to discuss the issue of amendments, and, in 1957 , a Commission on
the Constitution was established within the Cabinet with the goal of investigating
constitutional problems and preparing a draft amendment despite strong oppos-
ition from the Japan Socialist Party (JSP).
This fact is interesting for two reasons. First, why did the LDP government
use the modest expression “investigation of constitutional problems” instead
of “preparing a draft of a new constitution to replace the constitution imposed on
Japan” to define the goal of the commission? The most plausible reason is
that there was a fundamental difference in attitude at that time between the
Japanese people, who were positive about the postwar Constitution, and the
political forces in power, who were reluctant to accept it. Since its enactment,
many Japanese citizens had been strong supporters of the Constitution. The LDP
government could not run the risk of saying it was planning to enact a new
constitution after dispensing with the postwar Constitution entirely. Further, the
largest opposition party to the LDP was the JSP, which defined itself as a defender
of the Constitution. Despite the fact that the Socialist and Communist Parties were
strongly influenced by Marxism and usually took a critical stance towards modern
constitutionalism, the JSP and the Japan Communist Party were both staunch
defenders of the Constitution.
The JSP refused to participate in the Commission on the Constitution and most
constitutional scholars also took a dim view of the commission. Although
the commission examined the process for enacting the Constitution and what the
problems were within the Constitution, it took seven years for the commission to
release its final report. The commission was disbanded in 1965 after submitting its
final report, which failed to articulate a single conclusion or propose a specific
amendment procedure. From the late 1950 s to the 1980 s, public opinion polls
showed that a clear majority of the Japanese people did not favor revision of
the Constitution. Unable to mobilize two-thirds of the vote of both houses of the
Diet, as required for revising the Constitution,
5
the LDP’s efforts proved fruitless,
not even managing to reach the discussion stage. Since then, although the LDP’s
long-term dream of enacting a new constitution or revising the current Consti-
tution has remained on its party platform, no LDP government has risked making it
(^4) Shojiro Sakaguchi, “Japan,” in Markus Thiel (ed.),The “Militant Democracy” Principle in
Modern Democracies(Farnham: Ashgate, 2009 ), p. 219.
(^5) Article 96 of the Constitution.