Right after his ruling coalition's big gains in the July 10 Upper House election, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe effectively put his bid for amending the Constitution on the agenda of Diet discussions, urging parties to work toward building a consensus for revision — beginning as early as in an extraordinary session to be convened this fall. He is making the call now that pro-amendment forces have finally come to control two-thirds of the seats in both chambers of the Diet — a condition for initiating an amendment for approval in a national referendum. What's still not forthcoming, however, either from the prime minister or most other proponents of revision, is which part of the Constitution needs to be changed, how or why now.

What's particular about Abe's push for an amendment is his repeated emphasis on how the 1947 Constitution was drafted while Japan was under the Allied Occupation following its surrender in World War II. His statements echo the views of many amendment proponents that the Constitution must be revised because it had been "imposed" on the nation by the Occupation powers. While the prime minister's statements reflect his advocation of a "departure from Japan's postwar regime," they border on a lack of respect of the Constitution. Under such a way of thinking, it appears as if amending the Constitution is an end in itself, not the means to achieve concrete objectives. That hardly sets the stage for rational discussions on just what needs to be changed in the Constitution.

Abe also openly challenges the view that the role of a constitution is to limit state power to protect people's rights and freedom. During a Diet debate in 2014, Abe said such a way of thinking belongs to the days when monarchies held absolute power — and that a modern-day constitution should instead define the nation's form, ideals and future. An LDP draft revision released in 2012 says it's an obligation of the people to respect the Constitution, whereas Article 99 of the current Constitution states that public officials including ministers of state, Diet members and judges, along with the Emperor, "have obligations to respect and uphold the Constitution." Such thinking on the part of Abe and the LDP should be kept in mind as the issue unfolds in the Diet.