You mean get rid of it now, or have it never put in place?
Frankly, you would need to have a substantially divergent Pacific War for Article 9 to be butterflied away. One that ended either somewhat better for Japan or one that ended worse for Japan.
If Japan had somehow managed to achieve a negotiated peace without US occupation, there would be no US occupation forces writing their constitution and no Article 9. Conceivably a Pacific War that began without a direct "sneak" attack on US territory might end with a US somewhat more likely to accept something marginally less than full victory so it can get to the real business of defeating Germany.
On the other hand, if the USSR entered the Pacific War as a US Ally in 1942-43 and was instrumental in defeating Japanese Army forces in Manchuria and North China, they could legitimately claim an occupation zone in Japan after the war. Assuming a Cold War, then the possibility is good that both sides might consider rearming its client Japanese state and not think of something as intrusive as Article 9.