1　日本国憲法の平和主義と戦後責任

抄録

Through a Cabinet decision taken on July 1, 2014, the Abe administration reinterpreted Article 9 of Japanʼs 1946 Constitution. The new interpretation allows Japan to exercise the right to collective self-defense, which is something that postwar governments over the past 60 years have construed as prohibiting. This is not to say that the traditional interpretation was constitutional, because Article 9 prohibits not only use of armed forces for collective defense but also for individual self-defense. A 2014Cabinet decision violated the rule of law under the constitution even more flagrantly.

The pacifism of the Constitution is prescribed in both Article 9 and the Preamble. Article 9 renounces all forms of war, prohibits the maintenance of any significant military capability, and denies Japan the right of belligerency. The purpose of this article is to demonstrate that there are still two reasons for the pacifism of Japanese constitution.

One is that the Article 9 provides for the victims of historical Japanese aggression and colonial rule by preventing Japan from venturing out to disturb international peace again. Post- war Japanese governments, however, have not yet taken fully responsibility for this past. For example, Japanese politicians still visit Yasukuni Shurine.

The other reason is that Article 9, together with the Preamble, which states, “We recognize that all peoples of the world have the right to live in peace, free from fear and want.” says that there are no “just wars” from the peopleʼs point of view. Such an idea was incorporated into the Constitution because of the “horrors of war” ( Preamble) the Japanese people themselves experienced as both aggressors and victims during World War II. The Article 9 has been rated highly among grass-roots movements for peace around the world, e.g. The 1999 Hague Agenda for Peace and Justice for the 21st Century to Abolish War.