COMMITTEE ON RIGHTS OF CHILD DISCUSSES DISCRIMINATION, OTHER ISSUES, IN JAPAN

HR/CRC/98/27
27 May 1998

Discrimination was very serious in Japan and affected minorities, foreign residents, religious groups, the girl child and disabled children, members of the Committee of the Rights of the Child said this afternoon.

Continuing a review of how Japan gives effect to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the panel's experts cited testimony from non-governmental organizations pointing to discrimination against, among others, children born out of wedlock. Concerning the Korean minority in Japan, experts said Korean children reportedly had to learn both Korean and Japanese, otherwise they could not go to university.

A 23-member Japanese Government delegation led by Nobutoshi Akao, Permanent Representative of Japan to the United Nations Office at Geneva, said civil liberties organs in the country promoted activities to eliminate any discrimination against Koreans and foreign citizens. The delegation added that the Government was also striving to eliminate any discrimination that could exists against children of Ainu origin.

The panel resumes its meeting at 10 a.m. Thursday, 28 May, to conclude its dialogue with the Japanese delegation. Final conclusions and recommendations on all the reports reviewed at this session will be presented on 5 June.

Discussion

Committee experts thanked the delegation of Japan for its openness this morning and for recognizing that there was room for improvement in many areas affecting children. It was through dialogue that the children of Japan could be helped, that was why it was important to disseminate the conclusions of the Committee throughout the country, especially in schools.

One expert said she hoped the system of Civil Liberty Commissioners cited this morning would be considered in a broader sense. Also, a permanent mechanism for cooperation between the Government and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) was needed. Japan was in need of a system of data collection based on a comprehensive approach to the Convention, as the present system did not encompass all areas of the treaty, including those related to disabled children and suicide. A general, governmental strategy for children based on the Convention was needed. Information about children's complaints and how they were resolved was also needed.

The experts said the delegation spoke of the dissemination of hundreds of thousands of pamphlets and leaflets on the Convention, but the need to spread knowledge of the treaty even more remained. Would the Government consider carrying out a survey about the usefulness of the pamphlets on the Convention and consider changing the dissemination system to ensure children knew about its provisions? Would future laws be checked against the Convention to make sure they did not violate it? Could the Convention be invoked by parties in court? There was an understanding that the Government could not implement the Convention alone and should look upon NGOs as partners. Japan should formulate also guidelines to make the provisions of the Convention part of every day work.

Japan officially referred to 'illegitimate' children and their inheritance, but that should not happen, an expert said. According to the Convention, legitimacy should always be given to children.

In addition, Committee experts asked why the minimum marriage age was not the same for girls and boys.

One Committee member said Japan was a highly competitive society with a very developed education system, yet it seemed children experienced stress and it was not in their best interest to be pressed too much by the system. This was connected to bullying and suicide and other negative issues.

Concerning the definition of the child, an expert said he did not accept that the Japanese position was in accordance with the requirements of the Convention. The treaty protected persons under the age of 18 only. Its protection could not be extended to 19- and 20-year-olds. Thus, all young persons in Japan between the ages of 18 and 20 found themselves in a legal vacuum: they could not go to court and refer to the Convention as it only protected those up to the age of 18, and they were not equal to other adults.

Committee experts asked which administrative body looked into the equality of minorities and what were remedies offered against discrimination. Korean children from families who had lived in Japan for decades had to learn both Korean and Japanese, which was difficult for schoolchildren, or they would not be able to go to university. Perhaps the Government should take into consideration equalization of their Korean school certificates.

Were there Korean newspapers, magazines, or radio programmes? the delegation was asked. NGOs said it seemed sometimes Korean children used Japanese names to have a better chance of entering university. Was that legal? How did the system work?

Committee experts said NGOs had spoken to the Committee about ongoing discrimination against children born out of wedlock, an issue the Committee was very concerned about. The law said such children only inherited half as much as a child born to a married couple; the Government reportedly supported this, saying it was a way to protect married couples. Had there been any research done that the inheritance law really protected families? Identification papers also indicated children born out of wedlock, thus exposing them to discrimination. Discrimination was very serious in Japan, not only against children born out of wedlock and minorities but also against foreign residents, religious groups, the girl child and disabled children. Further information was required about the different forms of discrimination.

Focusing on the situation of disabled children, a Committee expert asked about their rights to education and health, saying it seemed they were subjected to some discrimination and prejudice. How did the Government help their integration and bring about a change of attitudes in conservative Japanese society?

In addition, experts requested further information regarding the minimum age for military service and for work; the existence, or lack, of legal provisions to ensure that the best interest of the child should be supreme, and whether the idea of hearing the views of children had been introduced into different institutions.

In response to questions raised, the delegation of Japan said that before a convention was ratified, its provisions were checked for compatibility with all relevant domestic laws. Only upon completion of needed amendments was the treaty ratified. In Japan the Convention prevailed over domestic laws.

Turning to a question about the ratification of International Labour Office Convention 138, the delegation said the age limit in the treaty was not in conformity with domestic law. Amendments to the Japanese Labour Standard Law had been presented to the Diet today to bring it in conformity with the Convention, but deliberations would not start until the next session. The Government was preparing the ground so that it could ratify the convention.

Concerning inheritance of children born out of wedlock, the delegation said the Japanese Civil Code gave children born out of wedlock half the inheritance given to children born to married couples. The Convention said unfair discrimination must be eliminated, but as far as the Japanese
interpretation was concerned, inheritance of children born out of wedlock did not fall under that category. A Supreme Court ruling in 1995 held that the position of children born inside and outside of wedlock must be respected. In order to respect the child born out of wedlock, he or she was awarded half the inheritance so that the position of legal marriages was also respected. That was the legal policy and was not unique to Japan. In February 1996, the Legal System Council had come up with an amendment to the Civil Code to remedy that difference. However, in June 1996, a public opinion survey carried out on the issue by the Prime Minister's office had shown that a majority of Japanese were against the amendment. The Government would keep an eye on the general public opinion to see if it should continue efforts to revise the law.

Concerning the difference in the marriage age between boys and girls, the delegation said that when a couple got married, they were starting a new family and they had to be mature, physically and mentally. The difference in the marriage age was not unique to Japan.

Turning to the issue of discrimination against foreigners and Korean residents, the delegation said civil liberties organs promoted activities to eliminate such differential treatment. Still, in 1997, there had been 34 cases charging discrimination against foreigners. It was regrettable that such cases existed. As far as Ainu children were concerned, civil liberties organs had so far not witnessed any concrete examples of discrimination, but the Government was striving to eliminate any discrimination that could exist. The school enrolment rate of Ainu children was lower than that of other Japanese children, although it was improving it had not reached a satisfactory level yet. The Ministry of Education gave special scholarships to Ainu children.

Children under the age of 15 were not entitled to express their views in front of family courts, the delegation said, adding that the court had to consider the ability and skill of any child under 15 to express himself.

In Japan, every child, depending on his or her maturity or age, was entitled to an education, the delegation continued. Guidance was provided to teachers so that they could decide what to teach children. In many schools, the curriculum was established on that basis. Korean and foreign children were allowed to enter regular Japanese schools and could pursue education in their language as an extracurricular subject. They were then entitled to go on to higher education. There was no discrimination as far as opportunities were concerned. Furthermore, Korean people did not have to take on Japanese names. However, in real life, sometimes, if they were seeking employment or trying to find a home, there was a possibility of discrimination, and perhaps that was why they used Japanese names. Of course, such a situation was wrong and a breach of the non-discrimination
principle. Some Japanese people still had discriminatory attitudes, which was a matter of great concern to the Government. Civil liberties organs would continue to try and address that issue.

Concerning children with disabilities, the Government tried to integrate them into society, although success depended on the degree of disability of the child, according to the delegation. Children with disabilities were not forced into special schools. Rather, the Government encouraged them to have exchanges with children in regular schools and with the community. The Government allocated special budgets to disabled children so that they had adequate care.

Stress syndrome was not limited to children, as adults also suffered from it, the delegation said. A pubic opinion survey showed that children were very stressed for various reasons. Spending so much time studying under the very competitive education system was a contributing factor. Authorities were trying to devise systems to evaluate the capacities of students in a comprehensive way, an issue that was being debated in the Diet.

Asked how the views of children were taken into account in matters affecting them, the delegation said schools asked children for their views during disciplinary measures. Following an April amendment to the child welfare system, before a decision was taken on whether or not a child was placed in an institution, his or her views had to be listened to in a hearing. That reform ensured that the best interest of the child was respected. Freedom of association of children was also allowed, except if a meeting was against the education system. And as children had immature political conceptions, their political meetings were not allowed at schools.

The legal status of children born inside or outside of wedlock had to be specified in the family register according to the Civil Code, the delegation said.