The article reports that in late April in a landmark verdict, the Shiminoseki branch of the Yamaguchi District Court ordered the Japanese Government to pay 300,000 yen to each of three South Korean women involved in a trial case brought by those who had been forcibly conscripted to provide sexual services by the Imperial Japanese Army. Their legal battle began in concert with others from the Philippines, the Netherlands, China and members of the Korean community in Japan, at the Tokyo District Court at the end of 1991.
He finds in the ruling clear reference to the role of government: the judge said " The nation’s parliamentary democracy is supposed to have been adopted to respect basic human rights, and courts are supposed to be invested with the authority to examine statutes with the aim of guaranteeing respect for basic human rights." Hence the government’s acknowledgement of the issue ( 5 years prior to the verdict) implies an obligation to propose a law. This argument is held to be weak by some experts and the lawyers of the 3 women, and is held as likely to be overturned on government appeal, and attention focused on the disparaging criticism of the decision by the justice minister.
However, Ichikawa writes, "the judge did a right thing because he filled an empty niche- a loophole resulting from the absence of a law to apply- with ‘justice.’" The ruling was based on the proposition that a grievous breach of fundamental human right s had occurred, that a resultant state of illegality existed even to the present day, one that "must be overcome even now."
He contrasts this with his expectation that the 3 comfort women involved in a case against the Japanese government would find their case rejected despite official acknowledgement of this issue due to an overwhelming rhetoric from the state which had at least 3 prongs 1) that the statute of limitations for the crimes had expired, 2) that the Japanese state could not be held responsible for these acts (by wartime Japanese forces) and 3) that questions of compensation had been settled in bilateral agreements
As a consequence the payment of compensation has been directed through the non-governmental "Asian Women’s Fund" , which implies no legal responsibility on the Japanese government. The consequence is that the successful verdict in this case is drowned by a clamour of voices against the lack of an apology and the apparent "peanuts" awarded. The writer however significantly notes that the judge has taken the lead that the government can follow in establishing better bi-lateral ties between Korea and Japan: frankness by Japan and the "only way out of the tangled situation is to enact a law which would authorise the payment of state compensation to the "comfort women". He writes:
" The members of the diet, who were severely criticized by the judge for their legislative negligence, should read the full text of the verdict he handed down in the Shimonoseki suit. "
© TR 5th/6/98
© Teal Ray... (with acknowledgement to Steve Hartley, Uzbekistan and the camels for inspiration)...