Background Information of and Explanation for Enhancement of Resolution
for Issues concerning Victims of Wartime Sexual Slavery Act
Regarding the Enhancement of Resolution for Issues
concerning Victims of Wartime Sexual Slavery Act, which are now being discussed,
I would like to talk about the reasons for the proposal and the summary of the
contents.
There have been
more than half a century since the end of this past war (World War II) and the
21st century is just around the corner. However, because Japan has inflicted great suffering to Asian
nations through its aggression and colonial rule, the people of these nations
still feel insecurity and have a very strong distrust against Japan. One of the direct causes for this distrust
is the “comfort woman” issue. The
so-called “comfort women” were the Asian women—including teenagers—who were
conscripted against their will by means of threats and flatteries by the
Imperial Japanese military or military police during World War II, who were
forced to work at such places as military-owned comfort stations as sex slaves,
and whose honor and dignity as women have been deeply violated.
Only after the need
for investigation was pointed out at the Standing Committee on Budget of the
House of Councilors, the “comfort woman” issues became recognized as a social
problem in this post war era. In the
beginning, the government took the position, “[the ‘comfort woman’ system was
established] by private corporations and the nation has no regard with it so
that it is impossible to investigate the matters,” but this position was
severely criticized by the Korean victims and others. Then, the government carried out investigations, and in August of
1993, for the first time recognized its military’s involvement with the
“comfort woman” issues and expressed a personal feeling of sorrow and
remorse. However, the government
insisted that the issue of compensation for the victims has been already
settled by the San Francisco Treaty as well as bilateral treaties and refused
to provide compensation.
Since the “comfort
woman” issue was taken up at the Commission on Human Rights of the United
Nations in February of 1992, it has been discussed as a major issue at the
World Human Rights Conference, World Women’s Conference and so forth. Special Rapporteur Radhika Coomaraswamy, who
was appointed by the Commission on Human Rights, investigated the matters in
the concerned nations and submitted the special report to the commission. In the report, she stated that “comfort
women” were wartime sex slaves and advised that the Japanese government
compensate the victims and disclose the pertinent information.
The government
responded to this report that the “comfort woman” issue had been already
legally settled and took a stance to refuse to accept it as valid. However, at the Commission on Human Rights
in April of 1996, there was no nation that supported Japan on this issue and
when the “Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women” was
adopted, the commission “took note” of this report.
Following this “take
note”, in April of 1998, at the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination
and Protection of Minorities, Special Rapporteur Gay J. McDougall rigorously
pursued the “comfort woman” issue, examined the issue from a legal perspective,
and demanded that the Japanese government provide the compensation.
Furthermore, the
Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations of
the International Labor Organization stated that the “comfort women “ are
violations of International Labor Organization No. 29 Treaty, which prohibits
forced labor, and expressed its desire that Japan provides compensation.
However, the
government claimed that the “comfort woman” issues should be resolved with the
participation of the Japanese people, collected contributions, and in July of
1995 established “Asian Women’s Fund.”
By providing “atonement” money, the government tried to avoid its legal
responsibility. However, a number of
the victims refused to accept this “atonement” money and the AWF has a
difficulty even in satisfactorily explaining the situation to the contributors.
In Japanese court
now, there are eight cases in which the plaintiffs are former “comfort
women.” (Two Korean cases, one
Korean-Living-in-Japan case, one Filipino case, one Dutch case, two Chinese
cases, one Taiwanese case. Four of
these received lower court judgements.)
The first judgement was given at the Yamaguchi Prefectural Court,
Shimonoseki Branch in April of 1998; and the judgement states the “comfort
woman” system is most probably a violation of international laws of the
time. It wrote, “even in the
mid-twentieth century standard of civilized nations, [the comfort woman system]
was inhuman and extremely gruesome”; and it is a “fundamental human rights
issue,” which is incompatible with the basic principle of the Japanese
Constitution. The judgement also
pointed out that the government’s and Diet’s responsibility for their failure
in enacting the necessary laws to resolve the issue and demanded the early
enactment of the laws. The ensuing
judgements tend to recognize the facts about the “comfort woman” system
although they do not admit the individual rights to claim. Given the court’s recognition of the facts
about the victims, the government of this once- oppressive nation must do
something.
Moreover, in many
countries, the voices that demand the political resolution are becoming ever
greater. The Korean government started to provide 3 million yen of monetary
support per person to the victims who refuse to accept “the ‘atonement’ money”
from the AWF and by using the diplomatic channel, announced, “Japan must
reflect upon the inhuman crimes that its Imperial military has committed during
World War II and it must apologize for what it did.” In October of the same year, Korean Prime Minister Kim Dae-Jung
visited Japan and said, “The Asian Women’s Fund alters the essence of the
“comfort woman” issue,” “The ‘comfort woman’ issue is a Japanese government’s
responsibility,” and “expects that this issue to be resolved in such a way that
the whole world would be satisfied.”
The Taiwanese
government also started to provide the former “comfort woman” victims 2 million
yen per person of the “substitution support” in December of 1997, before the
AWF began to give out its fund, and has repeatedly demanded that the Japanese
government apologize and compensate the victims.
In March of the last
year, the commission on civil, political and human rights in the lower house of
the Filipino Legislature adopted the “Resolution supporting the international
clamor for the Japanese Government to enact a post-war compensation law that
would fulfill the demands of justice for the women victims of sexual slavery or
‘comfort women’ in world war.” In
August, the upper and lower house of the California Legislature adopted a
proposal to demand a clear apology and reparations for the victims of war
crimes committed by the Imperial Japanese military, including “comfort woman”
victims. Right now, in the Federal Legislature of the United States, a similar
bill is proposed and some legislators expressed their hope for an early
resolution of the issue. In addition to
these, on January 12 of this year, the Hong Kong Legislative Commission—equivalent
to the national legislature—unanimously adopted a proposal to demand an
official apology and reparations for the victims.
On the “comfort
woman” issue, since 1990, there have been a number of the Diet members who took
the floor at plenary sessions as well as commissions; and in June of 1996, the
bill “Concerning the Establishment of Commission for Investigation of Victims of
Wartime Sexual Slavery” was submitted to the House of Councilors by the Diet
members of different parties, but the bill did not pass due to the expiration
of the legislative term. The Japanese government repeatedly insists, “The
compensation issues have already been finally and completely settled at the San
Francisco Peace Treaty” and has not taken any step to resolve the issues. At the 26th general meeting of
the Japan-Korea Politician Association in November of the last year, the joint
statement for the early resolution of the “comfort woman” issues was announced.
A number of victims
of Japan’s aggression are still alive today.
For each one of them, it is obvious that the compensation issue has not
been “finally and completely settled.”
The preamble of
the Japanese constitution states, “We desire to occupy an honored place in an
international society striving for the preservation of peace, and the
banishment of tyranny and slavery, oppression and intolerance for all time from
the earth” and shows the way that this nation should be going. With the ideal of this constitution and
considering the Japanese people to be Asians, I believe that the “comfort
woman” issue needs to be resolved quickly, and with this hope, I submitted this
bill.
Today, the AWF’s
effort is stuck in the dead end and I think it is Japan’s responsibility to
come up with other measures for the resolution. This bill clarifies Japan’s stance that it desires to resolve the
“comfort woman” issues and, by examining the basics of the issue, paves the
road for the resolution. For the
concrete issues, it is necessary to discuss the matters with the pertinent
nations, make decisions and carry out what has been decided.
Now I would like to
give you the outline of this bill.
First of all, in view of the fact that prior to and
during World War II, with an involvement of the Imperial Japanese Army and
Navy, organized and prolonged coercion of sexual act was carried out against
women, and because of such coercion, the dignity and honor of the women were
severely violated and considering that it is the responsibility of the nation
of Japan to take quick steps to restore the honor of the women, this act’s
objectives lie in providing the necessary grounds for the resolution of the
issues of “sexual slavery,” and by doing so, in improving the relationship
between the Japanese and the concerned nationals, and in making it possible for
Japan to occupy an honored place in an international society.
The term “comfort
woman” does not appropriately show the damage from which the victims are
suffering. Hence, in this bill,
“victims of wartime sexual slavery” is used instead.
Second, the
government must singularly apologize for the violation of the honor and dignity
of the victims of wartime sexual slavery and must implement necessary measures
including monetary compensation for the restoration of their honor and dignity
as soon as possible.
Third, the
government must lay down the fundamental policies on the measures to go forward
with the resolution of the issues concerning the victims of wartime sexual
slavery. Furthermore, the government
must acknowledge and report to the Diet any newly-stated fundamental policies
or any change of the existing fundamental policies.
Fourth, in
implementation of the measures in the “Second” paragraph, the government must
discuss the matters with the governments and other institutions of the
concerned nations, and with their understanding and cooperation, care for and
pay close attention to the bearing that the measures would have with the
international treaties that Japan has concluded. And it must try to gain the recognition of and understanding for
the measures from the Japanese people.
Moreover, in implementation of the measures in the “Second” paragraph,
the government must respect the intention of the victims of wartime sexual
slavery and pay close attention to their human rights.
Fifth, the
government must implement legal, budgetary and other kinds of measures for the
resolution of the issues concerning the victims of wartime sexual slavery.
Sixth, every year,
the government must report to the Diet on the measures that it has implemented
for the resolution of the issues concerning the victims of wartime sexual
slavery and on the findings as results of the investigation, which would be
outlined by the fundamental policies in the “Third” paragraph. It also must publicly announce the summary
of the report.
Seventh, the
Commission for Enhancement of Resolution for Issues concerning Victims of
Wartime Sexual Slavery—the commission that discusses the details of the
measures, coordinates with other institutions and do the administrative work
necessary for the execution of the measures—will be established at the prime
minister’s office as a special institution.
This act will lose
its power ten years after the date of enactment. It must be enacted by the ordinance within a month after the
proclamation of it.
These are the
reasons for the proposal and the summary of the contents.
Please very
carefully consider this bill and promptly support it.
(Tentative Translation by
Senator Shoji Motooka Office, Mar. 2000 )