The Wuhan virus crisis exposed Japan’s weakness in responding to emergencies, the limits of the postwar Constitution that gives almost no authority to the government, and the responsibility of citizens who have elected politicians capable of producing only such laws. Through Yoshiko Sakurai’s essay, this article examines constitutional revision and Japan’s rebirth as an independent nation.

May 4, 2020
However, ultimately, the responsibility lies with the people who elected politicians capable of producing only such laws.
We must be aware that the very nature of postwar Japan itself is being questioned.
The following is from an essay by Yoshiko Sakurai, published at the beginning of this month’s issue of the monthly magazine WiLL, which is filled with essays essential for every Japanese citizen to read, under the title “Worrying about the Weakness of Our Nation.”
Yoshiko Sakurai is one of the representative figures of the “national treasures” as defined by Saicho.
Everyone should be grateful for her arguments, which are also a supreme contribution to Japan.
At the same time, compared with Ms. Sakurai, who is truly a patriot and a journalist, one must feel, with anger from the bottom of one’s heart, that the people who call themselves editorial writers and anchors at Asahi and television media such as NHK are so terrible in quality that it is no exaggeration to call them criminals against the nation.

We must have not only “kindness” but also “strength.”
Let us be reborn as a nation capable of independence, starting with constitutional revision.

Do not be misled by the “Koike Theater.”
With the Tokyo gubernatorial election approaching, the intention of Yuriko Koike to appeal to the public by emphasizing her own presence can also be seen through.
In late March, Ms. Koike suddenly uttered the words “city lockdown.”
It was natural to imagine the road closures implemented in Wuhan.
As expected, panic buying of daily necessities and food occurred in supermarkets.
However, under Japan’s current law, there is no way that a city lockdown can be carried out.
The government clearly denied it and the confusion settled, but I have serious doubts about Ms. Koike’s method of needlessly stirring up people’s anxiety.
Regarding requests for business closures as well, opinions were divided between the government, which wanted to assess the effect of requests to refrain from going out, and the Tokyo Metropolitan Government, which wanted to request a wide range of businesses to close.
In the end, the two sides reached an accommodation, but the lack of coordination became a target of criticism from the opposition parties and the media.
Certainly, from an epidemiological standpoint, the most effective way to stop the spread of infection is for every citizen to stay indoors without taking a single step outside.
But politicians must also protect the lives of the people, that is, the economy.
If the economy collapses, salaries will fall, people will lose their jobs and be left on the street, and the people will suffer terribly.
The number of suicides will also increase.
If people’s actions are restricted in order to prevent the spread of infection, it is clear that the economy must be sacrificed.
On the basis of this harsh reality, Prime Minister Abe was forced to make an agonizing decision.
As a result, he first prioritized preventing the spread of infection, and then decided to take bold measures so that the Japanese economy could return to a growth path afterward.
In issuing the state of emergency declaration, the government made careful advance arrangements with industries such as finance, logistics, and retail, whose closure would have a major impact on daily life.
While making prevention of infection spread the foundation, continuing the minimum economic activity that can be continued and protecting small businesses is probably the thinking of a politician.

The resolve for constitutional revision that was shown.
The Special Measures Act for the Novel Coronavirus is based on the Special Measures Act for Novel Influenza, which was enacted under the Democratic Party government.
The Liberal Democratic Party, which could not correct its content when it was in opposition, should also reflect on that.
However, ultimately, the responsibility lies with the people who elected politicians capable of producing only such laws.
We must be aware that the very nature of postwar Japan itself is being questioned.
On April 7, Prime Minister Abe attended the House of Representatives Rules and Administration Committee and said, “In an emergency, how the roles that the state and the people should play in order to protect the safety of the people and overcome a national crisis are to be positioned in the Constitution is an extremely weighty and important issue.”
He thereby showed a positive stance toward the idea of including emergency provisions in the Constitution.
He also said, “While also taking into account the response to the novel coronavirus, I hope that active discussions beyond the framework of ruling and opposition parties will unfold in the Commission on the Constitution.”
The reason that individual freedoms and rights are emphasized while the authority of the government is almost nonexistent lies in the “Constitution without a state” that was rewritten after defeat in war.
The postwar Constitution is permeated by the idea that the state is something to be denied, and that unless the people monitor and bind it, power will run toward arbitrary abuse.
That is why the Constitution does not recognize either “the maintenance of war potential” or “the right of belligerency” for our country.
In connection with this state of emergency declaration as well, liberal media criticized “Prime Minister Abe’s strong-arm methods” and restrained the state of emergency declaration and restrictions on private rights.
Prime Minister Abe himself must have once again keenly felt that unless the foundation of the state is changed through constitutional revision, Japan cannot deal with crises.
The Rules and Administration Committee, which assigns bills to each committee for deliberation, is, so to speak, the command center of the Diet and its most important committee.
It is unusual for the Prime Minister himself to attend, and one can feel Prime Minister Abe’s extraordinary determination.
However, the reaction of the opposition parties was cold.
Renho tweeted, “I felt like saying, be quiet,” and Akira Koike, secretary-general of the Communist Party, protested by calling it “the ultimate disaster profiteering.”
I believe that politicians who utter such irresponsible and extremely rude abuse and continue to avert their eyes from the true issues facing Japan should leave the stage.