Free Multilingual Legal Advice Hotline open Sunday June 1, 1-5PM, from Japan Law Foundation

mytest

HANDBOOKsemifinalcover.jpgwelcomesticker.jpgFranca-color.jpg
Hi Blog.  Information courtesy of Kirill Konin at the United Nations…

I just received information about a hotline which will be open from 1 to 5pm on Sunday June 1st providing free legal advice to foreigners living in Japan. This is to test the demand for such a service in relation to research by the Japan Law Foundation being made by lawyers, NGOs and researchers on the necessity of starting a specialized law office/center for foreigners/refugees. Interpretation will be provided, in many languages.

If the hotline receives many calls, this will strengthen the case for such a service, which seems to be to be sorely needed.

If you also feel this could be an important service, please pass this information on.

For further information, please contact: Ms. Masako Suzuki on 03-5269-7773, at the  Executive Committee for Foreigners Legal Counseling (c/o ALT Law Firm)

MULTILINGUAL POSTER AVAILABLE FOR DOWNLOAD IN PDF FORMAT AT
=====================================

Free Legal Telephone Counseling for Foreigners/Refugees

– By lawyers in different languages –

We, the Executive Committee for Foreigners Legal Counseling, have planned a one-day free legal telephone counseling for foreigners and refugees.  Such a nationwide free legal telephone counseling focused on foreigners/refugees by lawyers has never been held so far.  More than 10 lawyers will join this event and multilingual interpretation service will be provided.  This event is held in cooperation with the Center for Multilingual Multicultural Education and Research of Tokyo University of Foreign Studies, the Solidarity Network with Migrants Japan, the Catholic Tokyo International Center (CTIC), Japan Association for Refugees (JAR), and the House in Emergency of Love and Peace (HELP)

Up to now, specialized legal consultations for foreigners/refugees are available only in regions around big city areas. The purpose of this event is to make it possible for foreigners who have difficulty accessing legal consultation to consult with lawyers.

It would be highly appreciated if you can help us disseminate information regarding this significant event.  Please feel free to contact us at the following contact for any questions or further information.

This event has been planned in relation to the research of the Japan Law Foundation being made by lawyers, NGOs and researchers on the necessity of starting a specialized law office/center for foreigners/refugees, to cope with the rapid increase of the non-citizen population in Japan.

Date: Sunday June 1, 2008 13:00 – 17:00

Tel: 03-3547-0300

Languages Available: Japanese, English, French, Spanish, Portuguese, Chinese, Korean, Tagalog, Thai, Russian, Indonesian, Burmese, Romanian and others.

Contact: Executive Committee for Foreigners Legal Counseling (c/o ALT Law Firm)

Tel:03-5269-7773 Fax:03-5312-4543

MULTILINGUAL POSTER AVAILABLE FOR DOWNLOAD IN PDF FORMAT AT
ENDS

Terrie’s Take 469: GOJ to sign Hague Convention on Child Abduction by 2010

mytest

HANDBOOKsemifinalcover.jpgwelcomesticker.jpgFranca-color.jpg
Hi Blog. The GOJ recently told the United Nations Human Rights Council that it suddenly has an interest in upholding international treaty against child abductions. Witness:

============================
HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL
Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review
Second session, Geneva, 5 – 19 May 2008
A/HRC/WG.6/2/L.10 14 May 2008
DRAFT REPORT OF THE WORKING GROUP ON THE UNIVERSAL PERIODIC REVIEW
Japan
(excerpt)
6. “Responding to various written questions submitted in advance, Japan stated its
willingness to cooperate with Special Rapporteurs, including arranging visits to the country
as time permits. Japan was also studying the relationship between the provisions of the
Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture protocol and domestic legislation,
including on how the “visits” mentioned in the protocol will be carried out in practice. It
stated that it regards the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child
Abduction and the Convention on Jurisdiction, Applicable Law, Recognition, and
Cooperation in respect of Parental Responsibility and Measures for the Protection of
Children as effective tools for children’s rights and welfare, and will continue to study the
possible conclusion of the two conventions by giving due consideration to, inter alia, the
current social system, and the cultural situation of Japan.”

http://www.upr-info.org/IMG/pdf/UPR-_Japan_WG_report__text.pdf

(More excerpts on Debito.org here.)

============================

Well, what a nice little article in ABC News and a bit of pressure from a couple of governments won’t do! As witnessed in this nice little roundup in Terrie’s Take from last weekend. Forwarding in its entirety. Bests, Arudou Debito in Sapporo

* * * * * * * * * T E R R I E ‘S T A K E * * * * * * *
A weekly roundup of news & information from Terrie Lloyd.
(
http://www.terrie.com)

General Edition Sunday, May 18, 2008 Issue No. 469 (excerpt)

Two weeks ago, the Japanese government made a notable announcement that may make Japan more compatible with the legal conventions used internationally, and will be of particular benefit to non-Japanese spouses of Japanese. The announcement was that by 2010, Japan would sign the the 1980 Hague Convention on Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, an international legal construct that attempts to deal with the thorny issue of court jurisdiction when children of international marriages are moved cross-border, often by a parent trying to thwart a court ruling in the previous jurisdiction.

Currently, Japan is known as a haven for disaffected Japanese spouses who, in getting divorced, abscond with their kids back to Japan. Once in Japan they can dare their foreign spouses to try getting the kids back — something that despite around 13,000 international divorces a year in Japan and more overseas, has NEVER happened.

The reason for this astounding statistic, that of zero repatriations of abducted children from international marriages after the kids have been abducted to Japan, is entirely to do with the attitudes of the Japanese judiciary and their wish to maintain 19th Century customs in the face of international pressure. Japan has ratified many parts of the Hague Convention treaties over the years, but in terms of repatriation of kids, they have been claiming for 20 years now to be “studying” the issue. That’s Japan-speak for “we’re not interested in making any changes”.

Our guess is that the recent announcement occurred after pressure from the USA and Canada, in particular. Things started to come to a head about 5 years ago, when fed up by repeating occurences of child abductions from both of those countries, and despite court decisions there for custody to go to the local parent, the consular staff of a number of these foreign embassies started holding annual summits to discuss the problem. These discussions escalated to pressure on foreign governmental agencies and politicians in some of Japan’s biggest trading partners — and finally someone spoke to the Japanese government at a sufficiently high enough level to get their attention.

The subject became especially sensitive when the Japanese were at the peak of their indignation over the North Korean abductions of Japanese citizens several years ago, and were seeking international support. All the while, Japanese law allowed similar types of abductions here.

In case you’re not up on the state of play, there were 44,000 international marriages registered in Japan in 2006, and probably a good percentage of that number again of Japanese marrying overseas but not bothering to register back in Japan. The divorce rate within Japan is about 30%, and for Japanese living overseas (take the US as an example), it is typical of the local population, so more like 50%-60%. Thus there are a lot of international separations — many of which are not amicable.

But it’s when the kids are involved that things start getting really nasty. Usually in the case of a divorced international couple going to court overseas and after custody is awarded, if one of the parents fears a possible adbuction situation, the couple can be placed under a restraining order not to travel without the other spouse’s consent. The USA, Canada, Australia, and UK all do this. The kids’ passports will often be withheld as well. Unfortunately, there have been a number of cases where the Japanese spouse then “loses” the kids Japanese passports and applies to the local consulate for replacements — only to hop a flight back to Tokyo a few hours later, with the kids in tow.

Once in Japan, the jurisdiction suddenly falls to the Japanese courts, even if there is a foreign arrest warrant out for the absconding partner, and in several cases, even if there is an Interpol arrest warrant out. In Japan, there is no concept of joint custody, and the partner allowed to keep the kids is the one that has held them for the previous few months.

The courts’ opinion here is that kids need a stable environment, and the act of being the only guardian for a period of time, even if that guardian was in hiding, qualifies for this — unless the kids are under 5 years old, in which case they will typically be returned to the mother (if the father is the abscondee), or to the father if the mother has deceased. But not always. There are cases where the Japanese mother has died and the Japanese grandparents have kept the kids, instead of returning them to the foreign father. You can read more about this sad state of affairs at http://www.crnjapan.com/en/.

You won’t believe that this kind of thing is still going on in a first-world country like Japan in the 21st century.

The Japanese court attitude thereby encourages Japanese spouses wanting to hang on to their kids to hightail it back to Japan and lie low for 6 months. Currently there has been no case, even after the Japanese Supreme Court has awarded rightful custody to the foreign parent, where that aggrieved foreign parent has been able to go get their kids back. The reason is quite simply that Japan doesn’t have a mechanism for properly enforcing civil suit judgments, and typically a breach of an order in a civil suit does not result in the offender being subject to a subsequent criminal suit.

Thus, the Hague Convention on child abduction provides a mechanism whereby if children are illegally removed from their country of habitual residence, they must be returned, and the jurisdiction for subsequent court decisions is taken out of the hands of the Japanese courts. This is the first step in making international court rulings involving kids, stick.

We believe that this is going to be a long and slow process, but once the treaty is signed and the first few cases start to be heard, either the kids involved will be returned or the parent trying to hang on to them will create an international brouhaha that will highlight to the world the lack of protection of rights for international parents here in Japan. Who knows, maybe this will start another process — that of allowing foreigners actually residing within Japan to also regain the simple right of access to their children after a divorce.

But in reality we think this level of change will take several more generations and a lot more foreigners living in Japan to achieve…
ENDS

Highlights of UN OHCHR Universal Periodic Review of Japan’s Human Rights Record, May 14, 2008

mytest

HANDBOOKsemifinalcover.jpgwelcomesticker.jpgFranca-color.jpg

Hi Blog. Here’s what investigating countries at the United Nations are saying about Japan’s human rights record.

Full file at http://www.upr-info.org/IMG/pdf/UPR-_Japan_WG_report__text.pdf, or
https://www.debito.org/UPR-JapanWGreport051408.pdf

First, some highlights of what the GOJ itself says it’s doing about following treaties and human rights standards, then other countries respond with a surprising degree of awareness. The biggest issues seem to be the death penalty, human trafficking, and rights for women (with historical issues brought up by neighboring Asian countries), but as far as Debito.org is concerned, there is plenty of attention devoted to issues we’ve been raising all along. Even if Special Rapporteur Doudou Diene’s reports on racism in Japan are mostly being ignored by our government, they certainly are being read by members of the UN.

Do try to read parts of the UPR Report with a straight face, as that’s what our government is making a number of risible claims with. I offer links to sections on Debito.org that are at odds with the GOJ’s claims. Arudou Debito in Sapporo

==============================
HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL
Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review
Second session, Geneva, 5 – 19 May 2008
A/HRC/WG.6/2/L.10 14 May 2008
DRAFT REPORT OF THE WORKING GROUP ON THE UNIVERSAL PERIODIC REVIEW
Japan
(excerpt)
7. Japan attached great importance to human rights education, based on the conviction that in order for all people to enjoy human rights and live contented lives, each citizen must fulfil his or her responsibility to uphold the freedoms and rights guaranteed to them, and at the same time must correctly understand and respect other people’s human rights. It referred to initiatives taken. Regarding the human rights of foreign residents in Japan, it is responding to various needs by establishing Human Rights Counseling Offices for Foreign Nationals with interpretation services at some Legal Affairs Bureaus. It was explained that in March 2002, the Ministry of Justice submitted the Human Rights Bill to establish a new Human Rights Commission which was not completed because of the dissolution of the lower house in October 2003, and the Ministry of Justice continued to review the Bill. Japan explained, inter alia, that it has been striving to realize a society without any form of racial or ethnic discrimination and that in order to prevent such human rights violations it pursues the strict implementation of relevant domestic laws and promotes activities for raising public awareness.

[COUNTERARGUMENT regarding the efficacy of these oft-cited “Human Rights Counseling Offices” here: https://www.debito.org/policeapology.html
also https://www.debito.org/japantimes070803.html]

8. …With regard to the police detention system, it was explained that the necessity of detention was strictly examined by the police, a prosecutor, and a judge in due order, and that a judge decides on its necessity and the placement of the detention for a maximum of 10 days. A prosecutor and a judge respectively review the necessity of the extension of the detention, and a judge order is also necessary for the extension, which cannot exceed 20 days in total. The Delegation stated that the substitute detention system was indispensable to carrying out prompt and effective investigations. At the police detention facilities, investigative officers were not allowed to control the treatment of detainees; detention operations were conducted by the detention division of the facility, which is not involved in investigations at all. The Delegation also explained that, regardless of the type of crime committed, detainees can have consultations with their lawyer at anytime and there is no official watch person during the meeting and no time limitation. Under the Penal and Detention Facilities Act, a new system has been introduced to make up a third party committee to inspect detention facilities and to state their opinions on the management of the facilities. In addition, a complaints mechanism has been developed in order to ensure the appropriate treatment of detainees…

[COUNTERARGUMENT regarding the underlined sections above:
https://www.debito.org/?p=1437
https://www.debito.org/whattodoif.html#arrested
https://www.debito.org/japantimes102305detentions.html
https://www.debito.org/japantimes081407.html
https://www.debito.org/?s=Idubor]

11. On the question of civil society cooperation in the process of drafting the national report, the Delegation indicated, inter alia, that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs posted information on the UPR system and process on its website, and asked for opinions ofNGOs and ordinary citizens about the government report and that as a result, it received opinions from 11 NGOs and 214 ordinary citizens. Additionally, the Delegation stated that Japan
recognized that there was still room for improvement, and stated that in the international community, due to globalization and environmental changes, new challenges were being faced and that Japan will continue its contribution to achieve better results for the human rights in the international community, in close cooperation with the United Nations, regional communities, other national Governments, and civil society.

[COUNTERARGUMENT: Read what happened at one of their attempts to ask for opinions of civil society–they refused to calm right-wing agitators and brought the meeting to a close, never to open again:
https://www.debito.org/?p=544]

QUESTIONS FROM OTHER COUNTRIES:
16. …Belgium also noted concerns about the prolonged detention in police stations’daiyo kangoku’, the high conviction rate and that several recent cases have indicated that forced confessions have been made, giving rise to regrettable judicial errors. Belgium recommended that in order to avoid the police and the judiciary putting excessive pressure on an accused person to confess: (i) there should be more systematic and intensive work to bring the risk of forced confession to the attention of the police, (ii) interrogation monitoring procedures should be reviewed, (iii) the use of prolonged police detention should be re-examined and (iv) the Criminal Code should be reviewed to ensure its conformity with article 15 of the Convention against Torture.

[MORE ON THIS: https://www.debito.org/?p=415]

18. …It also noted that the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism has requested the Japanese Government to eliminate racial discrimination and xenophobia. China hoped that the Japanese Government will seriously address those concerns and adopt effective measures to implement the recommendations of those mechanisms.

[MORE ON THIS: https://www.debito.org/rapporteur.html]

19. …Canada referred to studies showing that an increase in international marriages has resulted in an increase in complex divorce and custody cases and noted that there is no formal mechanism to deal with international child custody cases. It recommended that Japan develop a mechanism to ensure the prompt return of children who have been wrongfully removed from or prevented from returning to their habitual place of residence, and also examine the possibility of acceding to the 1980 Hague Convention on Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

[MORE ON THIS: https://www.debito.org/?p=798
https://www.debito.org/?p=607
https://www.debito.org/?p=1370]

…[Canada also] referred to reports which indicate the prevalent use of prolonged detention of arrested persons, including detention after they appear before a court and up to the point of indictment and recommended that Japan institute mechanisms to enhance procedural guarantees for the detention of detainees.

[MORE ON THIS: https://www.debito.org/?p=1652]

21. …[The] United Kingdom recommended that Japan implement the relevant recommendations of the Committee against Torture with regard to external monitoring of police custody and that it ratify the Optional Protocol to CAT as soon as possible. It also recommended that Japan review the Daiyo Kangoku system in order to ensure that the detention procedure is consistent with its obligations under human rights law. It also wished to know whether the Government is intending to take further measures in response to the concerns raised on these issues in other reports provided for this review. It further recommended that civil society be fully involved in the follow-up process to the UPR at the national level.

THE JAPANESE GOVERNMENT RESPONDS

28. Following the interventions, Japan noted that the Government pursues the goals of ensuring equal rights and opportunities for foreigners, respecting foreigners’ culture and values, and promoting mutual understanding to realize a society in which Japanese and foreigners can live together… Japan stressed its efforts, based on its Constitution and the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, to realize a society where there is no discrimination due to race, ethnic groups or others and its active work towards the elimination of racial discrimination in the United Nations and other forums. The Government noted that foreigners who wish to obtain Japanese nationality are not requested to change their names to Japanese names, and stated that foreigners can decide on their names on their own after naturalization…

OTHER COUNTRIES CONTINUE

33. …Brazil recommended that Japan consider adhering to the compliant procedures of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women and the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination and that it ratify the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture. It recommended that Japan consider establishing legislation defining and prohibiting discrimination in all forms and recommended that it consider a standing invitation to the special procedures.

34. …[Iran] strongly recommended that the Government adopt, as a matter of urgency, a national law against
racism, discrimination and xenophobia and set up an independent mechanism for investigating complaints ofhuman rights violations.

35. The United States of America expressed the hope that Japan’s commitment to democracy and the protection and promotion of human rights would serve as an example for others and wished to know what protections the Government has put in place to ensure that abuses do not occur in immigration detention centres. It also asked whether Japan will allow international monitors to examine the immigration detention centres and make recommendations to strengthen protections, and recommended that Japan permit international monitors to examine immigration centres.

36. …Germany also made reference to the concerns expressed by the Committee against Torture about the systematic use of the Daiyo Kangoku substitute prison system for the prolonged detention of arrested persons. It also noted that nongovernmental organizations had expressed concern regarding the non-regulation of the length of interrogations, restricted access of lawyers to their clients, and non-recording of sessions of interrogation.

40. Guatemala noted that racism and discrimination still exist in the Japanese society, indicating that the fight against all forms of discrimination and the protection of minorities, and especially vulnerable groups, required an appropriate legislative framework and therefore urged Japan to consider introducing a definition of discrimination in its criminal law. In the area ofprotection of the human rights of migrants and the fight against xenophobia, Guatemala noted the recommendation of the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism in favour of abolishing the system established by the Migration Office of the Ministry of Justice, calling upon citizens to proceed to anonymous denunciations on its website, of migrants suspected of being in an irregular situation, and recommended that it be abolished because this might constitute an incitation to racism, racial discrimination and xenophobia.

[MORE ON THIS: https://www.debito.org/japantimes033004.html]

THE JAPANESE GOVERNMENT RESPONDS

46. …Regarding the question on immigration detention centres, the Government noted that due attention is paid to the human rights of the detainees, and the cases where officials were accused to have committed violence mostly happened coincidently in the course of those official’s controlling the violation ofthe rules in those facilities. Detainees can submit complaints against their treatment to the Minister of Justice. Additionally, to prevent violence at penitentiary institutions, Japan provides officers with education to promote necessary human rights protection measures, and establishes complaints mechanisms and inspection committees. Medical services are provided to prisoners by doctors, and prisoners are transferred to medical prisons to receive necessary medical treatment.

[NOT ALWAYS, ACCORDING TO THE VALENTINE CASE: https://www.debito.org/japantimes081407.html]

OTHER COUNTRIES CONTINUE

50. …According to the information of the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, in Japan there are still cases of racial discrimination and xenophobia affecting national minorities, foreigners and migrants. Minorities are in a vulnerable economic and social situation with respect to employment, access to housing, marriage, pension coverage, access to health facilities and education and the State institutions. Russian Federation asked about steps taken to combat the manifestation of racial discrimination and xenophobia.

THE JAPANESE GOVERNMENT RESPONDS

59. Japan stated that, in penal institutions, attention should be paid to helping inmates sentenced to the death penalty maintain emotional stability as well as to ensure secure custody. Inmates sentenced to death are notified of their execution on the day of the execution. Japan is concerned that inmates should become emotionally unstable and could suffer serious emotional distress if they are notified in advance of the exact date. For this reason, Japan believes that the current practice is inevitable. The Government did not have statistics on the number of death penalty sentences in 2007, and thus was unable to respond whether there was an increase since 1980 or not. With regard to calls for a moratorium on the death penalty, Japan considered that it would be very cruel to first give the expectation to the prisoners that they will not be executed, and later inform them that they will be executed. With regard to imprisonment without parole, Japan considered that this may be a cruel and problematic system that has the possibility to destroy the personal character of prisoners; therefore the introduction of such a system needs to be considered very carefully.

[COUNTERARGUMENT: Fascinating logic, not based upon any science. Not everyone agrees: https://www.debito.org/?p=1426]

…On the question of the high rate of convictions, the Government noted that this is the aggregated result of the judgements given by each court, and that the criminal procedures are based on the very thorough investigation, very restrictive indictment based on the investigation and the proper proving at the trial, thus it does not consider high conviction rates as abnormal.

[COUNTERARGUMENT: 99.9% CONVICTION RATES ARE “NOT ABNORMAL”? Again, not everyone agrees, including former NPA prosecutor and now Dietmember Kamei Shizuka: https://www.debito.org/?p=1426]

…While it acknowledged criticism against the substitute detention system, the Government noted that it makes various efforts to ensure appropriate treatment of the detainees. It also pointed out that the system does not discriminate between Japanese and foreign detainees.

[COUNTERARGUMENT: Except that foreigners cannot be released bail, and cannot be released under any circumstances even when declared innocent by a court, during the prosecution’s appeal. That’s discriminating between Japanese and foreign detainees.
https://www.debito.org/?p=1447
https://www.debito.org/?p=1659]

…Japan also noted operations of the substitute detention system continue to be improved. On the issue of the video-recording of interrogations, the Delegation stated that statements by the suspect is important in order to elucidate the truth in investigations and that the mandating to record all interrogation sometimes can hamper relations between the investigator and the criminal, and may serve to stop the suspect from telling the truth. Japan noted that a careful consideration is needed of the introduction of such monitoring and video-taping.

[COUNTERARGUMENT: Fascinating logic, again not based upon any science. Better not videotape or the suspect might lie? That reason was made up on the fly.]

SUMMARY RECOMMENDATIONS MADE WHICH ARE RELEVANT TO DEBITO.ORG

6. Adapt national legislation to bring it into line with the principles of equality and non-discrimination. (Slovenia); Consider establishing legislation defining and prohibiting discrimination in all forms (Brazil); Consider introducing a definition of discrimination in its criminal law (Guatemala); Adopt, as a matter of urgency, a national law against racism, discrimination and xenophobia (Islamic Republic of Iran);

13. Ensure that the interrogation of detainees in police custody are systematically monitored and recorded and that the Code of Criminal Procedure is harmonized with article 15 of the Convention against Torture and article 14, paragraph 3, of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and uphold the right of defence to have access to all relevant materials (Algeria); (i) Work more systematically and intensively to bring the risk of forced confession to the attention of the police, (ii) review interrogation monitoring procedures, (iii) re-examine the use of prolonged police detention and (iv) review the Criminal Code to ensure its conformity with article 15 of the Convention against Torture, in order to avoid the police and judiciary putting excessive pressure on the accused to confess (Belgium); Institute mechanisms to enhance procedural guarantees for the detention of detainees (Canada); Review the Daiyo Kangoku system in order to ensure that the detention procedure is consistent with its obligations under human rights law and implement the Committee against Torture’s recommendation with regard to external monitoring ofpolice custody (United Kingdom);

16. Develop a mechanism to ensure the prompt return of children who have been wrongly removed from or prevented from returning to their habitual place of residence (Canada);
ENDS

UN OHCHR Minority Update: Japan reviewed by Human Rights Council

mytest

HANDBOOKsemifinalcover.jpgwelcomesticker.jpgFranca-color.jpg

Hi Blog. Here are two updates on Japan’s human rights behavior being considered for periodic review by the UN Human Rights Council. This is a new activity by the UN after the old Human Rights Commission was disbanded, accused for many years of having the world’s worst human-rights offenders as leaders, covering up their own abuses.

Now under this new organ with the same acronym, everyone is being subject to review once every four years. And according to the press releases below, Japan’s turn came last week. Forwarding primary-source documents to you. Pertinent sections underlined.

As it says below, you can also submit documents to the OHCHR if you want about human rights abuses in Japan. Five pages max, deadline July 14, 2008, by email (UPRsubmissions AT ohchr DOT org). Arudou Debito in Sapporo

///////////////////////////////////////////
Minority Update
N°12 – March-April 2008
United Nations
OHCHR Indigenous Peoples and Minorities Unit
Courtesy Ilona Klímová-Alexander
ialexander AT ohchr DOT org
(excerpt)

Universal Periodic Review (UPR)
General Assembly Resolution 60/251, decided that the Human Rights Council (HRC) shall “undertake a universal periodic review, based on objective and reliable information, of the fulfillment by each State of its human rights obligations and commitments…”.

The first session of the UPR Working Group (UPR WG) of the HRC took place from 7-18 April 2008 and considered the human rights record of the following countries: Bahrain, Ecuador, Tunisia, Morocco, Indonesia, Finland, United Kingdom, India, Brazil, Philippines, Algeria, Poland, Netherlands, South Africa, Czech Republic, and Argentina.

The second session of the UPR WG is taking place from 5-19 May 2008 and considers the human rights record of the following countries: Gabon, Ghana, Peru, Guatemala, Benin, Republic of Korea, Switzerland, Pakistan, Zambia, Japan, Ukraine, Sri Lanka, France, Tonga, Romania, and Mali.

The reports, as adopted by the UPR WG, as well as statements by States, are accessible at the UPR section of the Extranet at http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/form.htm. The meetings of the sessions can be viewed through the UN webcast, either live or archived (http://www.un.org/webcast/unhrc/index.asp).

OHCHR posts daily highlights of the sessions of the UPR WG, providing an overview of the interactive dialogues by listing the issues raised, and which are prepared for use by the media, i.e. they are not an official record. The daily highlights can be accessed at http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/UPR/Pages/MeetingsHighlightsSession2.aspx.

In June 2008, at the eighth session of the Human Rights Council (HRC), the HRC plenary will adopt outcome documents on each country reviewed at the 1st and 2nd sessions of UPR WG. At the HRC plenary, one hour has been allotted for each country, during which NGOs have the possibility to make interventions (differently from the 3-hour country sessions at the WG on the UPR, where interventions are limited to States).

The third session of the UPR WG is scheduled from 1 to 12 December 2008 and will consider the following countries: Botswana, Bahamas, Burundi, Luxembourg, Barbados, Montenegro, United Arab Emirates, Israel, Liechtenstein, Serbia, Turkmenistan, Burkina Faso, Cape Verde, Colombia, Uzbekistan, and Tuvalu.

NGOs, wishing to submit information for consideration and possible inclusion by OHCHR in a summary of stakeholders’ input for this UPR review, are invited to send their contributions. The deadline for submission of contributions by NGOs to the third session of the WG on the UPR has been set at 14 July 2008. Please note that the page limit for submissions is 5 pages when submitted by individual stakeholders, and 10 pages when submitted by large coalitions of stakeholders. More detailed reports may be attached for reference only. This information will be available on line for others to access. Submissions should be sent to the following email address: UPRsubmissions AT ohchr DOT org.

For more information see http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/UPR/Pages/UPRMain.aspx
Contact person: Erik Friberg efriberg AT ohchr.org.

===========================
(skip)

17 March to 7 April 2008 – CCPR
The Human Rights Committee (CCPR) held its 92nd session from 17 March to 7 April 2008 in New York. The following State party reports were examined during this session: Tunisia, Botswana, Republic of Macedonia, and Panama. The Committee expressed concern at the persisting problems faced by minorities in the Republic of Macedonia, such as police violence, lack of language support in judicial proceedings, inadequacy of educational opportunities and lack of a protective and non-discriminatory learning environment. The Country Report Task Forces considered and adopted a list of issues on reports submitted by Japan, France, Nicaragua and Ireland. Concluding observations and more information are available at:
http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrc/hrcs92.htm

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////

How did things turn out? Here is the overview from the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) group of the Human Rights Commission.

Again, this is only an overview. I’ll have the full review up here on Japan on Debito.org this evening. Arudou Debito in Sapporo

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Japan’s review in the Working Group,
Friday 09 May 2008, Afternoon 2.30 pm– 5.30 pm
Overview of the Working Group session
Courtesy of UPR-Info.org and IMADR-JC
http://www.upr-info.org/IMG/pdf/Summary_of_Japan_s_review.pdf
The Troika
The Troika was composed of representatives from France, Indonesia and Djibouti. Only France took the floor during the interactive dialogue, mentioning its membership in the Troika.
Presentation by Japan
Speaking time: 22 minutes
Speaker: H.E. Mr. Yoshitaka Akimoto, Ambassador in charge of UN Affairs, Ministry of
Foreign Affairs of Japan

Recognition of problems and/or concerns: the delegation didn’t point out challenges or recognized concerns.

Achievements made: signature of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearances and is making efforts to ratify them; became party of the Rome Statute in the International Criminal Court (in October 2007); Basic Plan for the Promotion of Human Rights Education and Encouragement (2002); establishment of Human Rights Counseling Offices for Foreign Nationals; submission by the Minister of Justice of the Human Rights Bill to establish a new independent Human Right commission; access to the ICERD in 1995 and domestic laws for racial discrimination; adoption of the Second Basic Plan for gender Equality (2005); laws in 2005 and 2006 for improving the conditions of detainees; the Constitution emphasises respects for fundamental human rights;

Other issues: supports the view that human rights are a legitimate concern of the international community;

Answers to written questions: cooperation with Special Rapporteurs (Latvia); intention to ratify the Optional Protocol to CAT (UK); adherence to The Hague Convention on Child Abduction of 25 October 1980” and “The Convention Parental Responsibility and Protection of Children of 19 October 1996 (UK); existence and status of National Human Rights Organizations (UK); measures to eliminate racial discrimination; discrimination against women (including marriageable age); conditions of detention; police detention system; death penalty; participation of the civil society for the national report. Interactive dialogue

Number of countries that took the floor

42 States took the floor during the interactive dialogue: 26 members States of the Human Rights Council (the Philippines, Malaysia, China, Canada, UK, Egypt, France, Slovenia, Mexico, the Netherlands, Brazil, Germany, Republic of Korea, Guatemala, Switzerland, Bangladesh, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, Jordan, Italy, Russian Federation, Qatar, Sri Lanka, Romania, Pakistan, Peru); 16 non-member States (Algeria, Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea, Belgium, Tunisia, Luxemburg, Portugal, Poland, Albany, Islamic Republic of Iran, USA, Mauritania, Latvia, Turkey, Argentina, Slovakia, Vietnam).

Questions/issues raised

Indigenous Peoples – Algeria, Peru; Women’s rights – Portugal, Brazil, Pakistan; Violence against women – Algeria, Philippines (trafficking), China, Canada, Iran (domestic violence); gender equality – Portugal (stereotypes in labour market and political field), Slovenia, Iran (stereotypes); Discrimination against women – France, Slovenia (marriageable age), Germany (women from minorities), Azerbaijan, Romania; Trafficking in persons – Philippines, Canada, Netherlands (Slavery practice of comfort women during WWII), Jordan, Iran (prostitution and exploitation), Romania; Bullying in schools “ijime” – Philippines; Japanese Military Sexual Slavery – North Korea; Death Penalty – Belgium, Luxemburg, Mexico, Switzerland (moratorium), Portugal, Netherlands (training for judges), Brazil; Pre-trial and Detention conditions – Algeria (police custody), Canada, Iran (health care and torture in prison); Police stations “daiyo kangoku” – Algeria, Belgium, Malaysia, United Kingdom; Training in human rights of law enforcement officials – Canada, Tunisia; Rights to development – Egypt; Technique cooperation for developing countries – Tunisia; International human rights instruments – Algeria; Luxemburg; Albania, Mexico, Azerbaijan; Cooperation with Special Procedures – Latvia; Violations on the Internet – Poland; Rights of the Child – China (child abuse and child pornography), Mexico, Brazil, Turkey, Azerbaijan, Italy (corporal punishment in school), Sri Lanka (National Youth Policy); Conscientious objection – Slovenia; National Human Rights Institution – Philippines, Canada, Mexico, Turkey, Qatar; Migrants – Philippines, Brazil, USA (immigration detention centres), Azerbaijan (workers); Racial discrimination – North Korea (against Koreans), China, Brazil, Iran, South Korea, Guatemala; Torture – Brazil; Human Rights education – Ukraine; Old population – Vietnam, Mauritania (old workers); Minorities – Philippines, Peru; Refugees – Slovakia; Asylum seekers – Slovakia;

Recommendations

Conditions of detention

– Review the monitoring of interrogation of detainees to be in accordance with CAT and humanitarian law (Algeria, Belgium, UK)

– Institute procedural measures which protect detainees (Canada)

– Respect of the safeguard guaranty, including in death penalty case (Italy) NHRI

– Establishment of a NHRI in accordance with Paris Principles (Algeria, China, Canada, Qatar)

Human trafficking

– To take measures to deal with military sexual slavery (DPRK)

– To take measures against discrimination against Koreans (unemployment, obligation to change the name) (DPRK)

– Continue efforts in this regard (Canada)

Racial Discrimination

– Immediate measures (DPRK)

– Measures to implement the recommendations made by the SR (China)

– Measures for complaints procedures (France) Women’s rights

– Continuation of the measures for violence against women, including reparations (Canada)

– Measures for gender identity (Canada)

– Measures for comfort women during WWII (France, Republic of Korea)

Death Penalty

– Moratorium in order to abolish death penalty (UK, Luxemburg, Portugal, France, Albany, Netherlands, Switzerland, Italy)

Participation of civil society

– Integration of the civil society in the following of the report (UK) International Instruments

– Ratification of CAT (UK, Albania)

– Ratification of OP-CEDAW (Portugal, Mexico)

– Ratification of OP-CAT (Mexico, Brazil)

– Ratification of Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (Mexico)

– Ratification of International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families (Peru)

– Adhere to the complaints procedures of CEDAW and CERD (Brazil)

– Visit of SR (Brazil)

Migrants

– Permit international monitoring for immigration detention centres (USA) Indigenous People

– Review the land rights and other rights of the Ainu population and harmonize it with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (Algeria)

– Make a dialogue with indigenous people (Guatemala)

Rights to development

– continue development assistance (Bangladesh)

– extend the efforts regarding to MDG’s (Bangladesh) Minorities

– Establishment of a independent body (Slovakia) Rights of the Child

– Develop a mechanism to ensure the prompt return of children who have been wrongfully removed from or prevented from returning to their habitual place of residence (Canada)

Sexual orientation

– Take measures to eliminate discrimination based on sexual orientation (Canada) Answers provided by Japan on questions/issues raised and recommendations Racial discrimination (Brazil); Trafficking in persons (Philippines, Canada); Bullying of children in schools (Philippines); Women’ rights; Relationship between North Korea and Japan (North Korea); Sexual orientation (Canada);

Second Round: Rights of the Child; Indigenous peoples (Guatemala); Monitoring of immigration detention centres; Investigation in penal institutions; Death penalty and moratorium; Refugees; National police agency; Immigration; Corporal punishment in schools (Italy).

Issues for follow-up

The delegation argued that it is ready to cooperate with Special Representatives, in order to visit the country. Besides, the Bill to establish a new Human Rights Commission is currently reviewed by the Ministry of Justice.

Pakistan asks for the measures taken for the inclusion of gender perspective in the following of UPR. Furthermore, Slovenia recommends the State to integrate the gender perspective in the following of the report.

States that made solely welcoming statements

Argentina

Human Rights mentioned during the review but on which the delegation did not give a response

Rights to development (Bangladesh); Torture;

Speaking times Overall duration of the review: 2 hours and 41 minutes Of the State under Review – During its opening statement: 24 minutes – Overall speaking time employed to respond to other States’ questions during the interactive dialogue: 38 minutes – Concluding remarks: 1 minute

Disclaimer: note that this document only represents an overview with the aim of providing the list of issues that were raised during the discussion and should therefore not be quoted as an official document of the UPR process.
=================================
ENDS

Reuters: UN’s Doudou Diene checking out racism in USA

mytest

HANDBOOKsemifinalcover.jpgwelcomesticker.jpgFranca-color.jpg
Hi Blog. UN Special Rapporteur Doudou Diene, who has visited Japan three times in the past, called racism here “deep and profound”, and urged Japan to pass laws against racial discrimination, is now visiting the US for the same reason.

Good. Let’s see how the USG deals with his report (and let’s see how high up Diene gets meetings. Even Tokyo Gov. Ishihara found no time to meet Diene on any of this trips…). The GOJ essentially ignored Dr. Diene’s reports, alas.

More on Dr. Diene on the Debito.org blog here. Arudou Debito in Sapporo

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////
U.N. racism investigator to visit U.S. from Monday
Fri May 16, 2008 2:48pm EDT By Stephanie Nebehay
http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSL1684309820080516?feedType=RSS&feedName=politicsNews&rpc=22&sp=true
Courtesy of Pat O’Brien

GENEVA (Reuters) – A special U.N. human rights investigator will visit the United States this month to probe racism, an issue that has forced its way into the race to secure the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination.

The United Nations said Doudou Diene would meet federal and local officials, as well as lawmakers and judicial authorities during the May 19-June 6 visit.

“The special rapporteur will…gather first-hand information on issues related to racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance,” a U.N. statement said on Friday.

His three-week visit, at U.S. government invitation, will cover eight cities — Washington D.C., New York, Chicago, Omaha, Los Angeles, New Orleans, Miami and San Juan, Puerto Rico.

Race has become a central issue in the U.S. election cycle because Sen. Barack Obama, the frontrunner in the battle for the Democratic nomination battle, stands to become the country’s first African American president.

His campaign has increased turnout among black voters but has also turned off some white voters in a country with a history of slavery and racial segregation.

Diene, a Senegalese lawyer who has served in the independent post since 2002, will report his findings to the U.N. Human Rights Council next year.

However, the United Nations has almost no clout when it comes to U.S. domestic affairs and is widely perceived by many as interfering. The United States is not among the 47 member states of the Geneva-based forum, but has observer status.

In a report last year he said Islamophobia had grown worldwide since the September 11 2001 attacks on the United States, carried out by al-Qaeda militants.

DEATH PENALTY

A U.N. panel which examined the U.S. record on racial discrimination last March urged the United States to halt racial profiling of Americans of Arab, Muslim and South Asian descent and to ensure immigrants and non-nationals are not mistreated.

It also said America should impose a moratorium on the death penalty and stop sentencing young offenders to life in prison until it can root out racial bias from its justice system.

Racial minorities were more likely than whites to be sentenced to death or to life without parole as juveniles, according to the U.N. Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. It monitors compliance with an international treaty which Washington ratified in 1994.

U.S. officials told the body, made up of 18 independent experts, that they were combating hate crimes such as displays of hangman’s nooses and police brutality against minorities.

Some 800 racially motivated incidents against people perceived to be Arab, Muslim, Sikh or South Asian had been investigated since the September 11 attacks, they said at the time.

Substantial progress had been made over the years in addressing disparities in housing, education, employment and health care, according to a U.S. report submitted to the talks.

(Additional reporting by Matt Bigg in Atlanta; Editing by Jonathan Lynn and Jon Boyle)
ENDS

Burma/Myanmar junta’s connection to Japanese Imperial Army

mytest

HANDBOOKsemifinalcover.jpgwelcomesticker.jpgFranca-color.jpg
Hi Blog. It’s been a mystery to me for years now why Burma (now Myanmar basically by military junta whim) has become such a basket case–moving from being the richest country in SE Asia to the poorest over two generations–and one that cares more about putting down protesting monks than helping out its cyclone-ravaged people.

Here’s one reason hinted at by a journalist: historical connections to the Imperial Japanese Army–and how it got its template to suppress a citizenry from Wartime Japan.

It may also be another reason why the GOJ is still surprisingly cosy with the Burmese junta, to the point of muting criticism even when a Japanese journalist gets shot by the Burmese military (imagine what would happen if that had occurred in, say, China or North Korea!). Comment follows article:

============================
Why Burma has been trashed for 46 years
The Japan Times: Wednesday, May 14, 2008
http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/eo20080514gd.html
By GWYNNE DYER

LONDON — The Burmese regime is not to blame for the powerful cyclone that struck the Irrawaddy Delta and Yangon early this month, killing up to a hundred thousand people. But it certainly will be to blame for the next wave of deaths if aid does not soon reach the survivors.

A hundred years ago, the victims of such a catastrophe were on their own, but there are now well-established routines for getting help in quickly from outside. We saw them at work in the same region during the tsunami that killed at least twice as many people in 2004. Nothing could be done for those who died in the first fury of the event, but relatively few died from disease, injuries, exposure or sheer hunger or thirst in the days and weeks that followed.

Indonesia, Thailand, Sri Lanka and India — the nations worst hit by the 2004 tsunami — are reasonably well-run countries that were able to help their own citizens, and they had no hesitation in welcoming international aid as well. Burma (which got off lightly in 2004) is very different. The question is: why?

What sane government would block the entry of foreigners bringing exactly the kind of help that is needed — people whose professional lives are devoted to disaster relief — when at least a tenth of the country’s people are living in the open, with little access to food or clean water?

The short answer is that the generals who rule Burma are ill-educated, superstitious, fearful men whose first priority is protecting their power and their privileges.

They almost lost both during the popular demonstrations led by Buddhist monks last year, and they are terrified that letting large numbers of foreigners in now might somehow destabilize the situation again. They are sitting atop a volcano, and they know it.

But that is not really a complete answer, for it begs the question: Why has Burma fallen into the hands of people like that not just for a few years, but for 4 1/2 decades? Thailand has the occasional short-lived military coup, Indonesia had its problems with Sukarno and Suharto, and Cambodia had the horrors of Year Zero, but no other country in the region has been misgoverned so badly for so long.

It seems incredible now, when neighboring Thailand has four times Burma’s per capita income, that at independence in 1948 Burma was the richest country in Southeast Asia. With huge resources, a high literacy rate, and good infrastructure by the standards of the time (due to the British Empire’s obsession with railways and irrigation projects), it seemed fated to succeed. Instead it has drifted steadily downward, and is now the poorest country in the region.

The problem is the army, obviously, but why is the army such a problem? Perhaps it is the legacy of the “Thirty Comrades.” Rarely has such a small group of people dominated a whole country’s history for so long.

The Thirty Comrades were a group of young Burmese students (average age 24) who went abroad in early 1941 to seek military training so they could come home and launch a rebellion against British rule. Most of them were more or less Communist in orientation, and their original intention was to get training from the Chinese Communists.

By chance they fell in with the Japanese instead. They returned under the wing of the Japanese invaders at the end of the year as the “Burma Independence Army,” but switched sides in 1944 when it became clear that the Japanese would lose the war. They combined the authoritarian traditions of the Imperial Japanese Army with the ruthless ideological certainty of militant Marxism, and they dominated the army of the new republic from its independence in 1948.

It was this army, the nastiest behavioral stew imaginable, that seized power in 1962 and has ruled Burma ever since. The last of the Thirty Comrades, Ne Win, only retired in 1988, and continued to exercise great influence from behind the scenes until only 10 years ago.

Whatever ideology the army once had is long gone. It has become so corrupt that Burma ties with Somalia for last place on Transparency International’s corruption index. The country exists merely to serve its armed forces, which have never shown any hesitation in shooting citizens who question their right to rule.

Its commanders are fully aware that most Burmese hate their rulers, and fear that the presence of a large number of foreigners might serve as a spark for another popular uprising. Even if another million and a half lives depend on the rapid delivery of emergency aid to the desperate survivors in the delta, as Oxfam fears, the army will severely restrict the entry of foreign aid personnel as long as it can resist the international pressure to let them in.

Hundreds are probably dying each hour who could be saved if the food, shelter, water purification equipment and medical teams could pour in as they usually do after a disaster, but the army is half a million strong, so nobody is going to fight their way in. The Burmese, as usual, are on their own.

Gwynne Dyer is a London-based independent journalist whose articles are published in 45 countries.
The Japan Times: Wednesday, May 14, 2008

ENDS
==============================

COMMENT: Regarding GOJ cosiness, according to the Japan Policy Research Institute:

====================
While the Japanese Foreign Ministry claims to be engaged in a “quiet dialogue” with the junta to promote democratization, business interests have turned a blind eye to politics and lobbied for full economic engagement, including new aid. As early as June 1994, Keidanren, the powerful Federation of Economic Organizations, sent a special fifty-man mission headed by Marubeni chairman Kazuo Haruna to Rangoon to meet with the junta’s top brass. In the wake of the mission, many Japanese companies, especially banks, opened branch offices in Rangoon. Two years later, in May 1996, Keidanren upgraded its informal study group in Burma to a “Japan-Myanmar Economic Committee.” The timing was less than opportune, for SLORC was then in the middle of a crackdown on the NLD about which the Japanese government expressed great concern….

“In a special year-end issue of Asiaweek (December 1997), [economic pundit Ken’ichi ] Ohmae disparaged Suu Kyi’s 1990 election victory, again linking her to the United States: “The West knows Myanmar through one person, Aung San Suu Kyi. The obsession with Suu Kyi is a natural one if you understand the United States. Superficial democracy is golden in the U.S.: Americans love elections. Just as Myanmar is Buddhist, and Malaysia is Islamic, America has a religion called democracy.”
====================
JPRI Working Paper No. 60: September 1999, Japan’s “Burma Lovers” and the Military Regime, by Donald M. Seekins
http://jpri.org/publications/workingpapers/wp60.html

This is a tangent to Debito.org, but an interesting one to follow. People with more knowledge on this (since it also offers some insight into the GOJ’s general attitude towards human rights) are welcome to comment. Arudou Debito in Sapporo
ENDS

UN News: first group of 16 nations reviewed by HRC

mytest

HANDBOOKsemifinalcover.jpgwelcomesticker.jpgFranca-color.jpg
Hi Blog.  Japan’s not yet under the UN Human Rights Council microscope.  But at this rate it soon will be.  And I’m looking forward to seeing comments and excuses about why we still have no law against racial discrimination twelve years after effecting the ICERD.  Arudou Debito in Kurashiki 

//////////////////////////////////////////////

From: UNNews@un.org
Subject: UN REVIEW OF FIRST GROUP OF COUNTRIES’ HUMAN RIGHTS RECORDS WRAPS UP
Date: April 19, 2008 4:01:07 AM JST

The
United Nations Human Rights Council has concluded its review of the first batch of countries as part of the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) – a new mechanism to examine the record of every UN Member State.

The mechanism’s Working Group wrapped up its first session in Geneva today after evaluating the rights records of 16 nations: Bahrain, Ecuador, Tunisia, Morocco, Indonesia, Finland, the United Kingdom, India, Brazil, the Philippines, Algeria, Poland, the Netherlands, South Africa, the Czech Republic and Argentina.

“Having witnessed the energy which you have all displayed during this session, I have no doubt that we shall collectively rise to the occasion and achieve the primary goal of the UPR, which is the improvement of the human rights situation on the ground,” said Council President Doru Romulus Copstea in a message delivered at the meeting’s close by Vice President Boudewijn Van Eenennaam.

The Working Group’s next session will be held from 5 to 19 May, during which 16 more Member States’ records will be reviewed.

The UPR is one of the reforms which differentiate the Council from the Commission on Human Rights, which it succeeded in 2006.

Under the Review’s work plans, 48 countries are scheduled to be reviewed each year, so that the UN’s complete membership of 192 countries will be reviewed once every four years.

Last month, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon urged the Council to ensure that all countries were scrutinized equally. “The Review must reaffirm that just as human rights are universal, so is our collective respect for them and our commitment to them,” he said.

ENDS

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// 

From: UNNews@un.org
Subject: SOME STATES STILL DO NOT RECOGNIZE RACISM’S EXISTENCE, UN RIGHTS CHIEF CAUTIONS
Date: April 22, 2008 8:00:31 AM JST

As
preparatory meetings kicked off today in Geneva in preparation for next year’s review of the landmark 2001 global conference against racism, the top United Nations human rights official warned that some States still do not recognize the existence of racism as a phenomenon.

“National laws and measures to ensure its elimination in most countries are either inadequate or ineffective,” said High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour. “As a result, vulnerable groups continue to suffer aggression while abusers enjoy impunity.”

She added that few nations have implemented the necessary action plans to remedy this situation.

The process to prepare for the 2009 Durban Review Conference began in 2006, but its first substantive meeting was held by the Preparatory Committee today.

The Conference will assess progress and implementation at the regional, national and international levels of the Declaration and Plan of Action adopted by the 2001 World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance.

“The Durban Review Conference is not, and should not be seen as, a repetition of the 2001 World Conference,” Ms. Arbour pointed out at the opening meeting of the Preparatory Committee.

Instead, “it is a platform to evaluate progress, an opportunity to reinvigorate commitments, and a vehicle to fine-tune responses in a purposeful and contextual manner.”

According to a press release from Ms. Arbour’s Office, known as OHCHR, progress since the 2001 meeting – a huge event which attracted some 18,000 people – has been patchy.

The High Commissioner acknowledged that the controversy surrounding the original Durban Conference has not completely subsided.

“There is no hiding the fact that the Durban Review Conference, even before moving its first, preparatory steps, has already elicited criticism and continues to raise concerns which, if not squarely confronted and resolved, may ultimately jeopardize a successful outcome of this process,” she said.
ENDS

Japan Times: Canada, U.S. nudge Japan to join child abduction resolution framework

mytest

HANDBOOKsemifinalcover.jpgwelcomesticker.jpgFranca-color.jpg
Hi Blog.  This story is from the Japan Times – Saturday, March 15, 2008, on a topic of import to Debito.org:  child custody after divorce–and Japan’s difficulty with accepting children brought back to Japan without the permission of both parents as abduction.  Comment from the submitter follows article.  Debito in Matsuyama

/////////////////////////////////////////////////

Canada, U.S. nudge Japan to join child abduction resolution framework

By TAKAHIRO FUKADA
Staff writer

http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20080315a6.html

Canadian and the U.S. government officials and a law expert Friday
urged Japan to join an international legal framework to resolve
cross-border cases of child abduction by parents and others.

As the number of international marriages rises, there will be a
corresponding rise in divorces among multinational couples. The Hague
Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction
states that children removed or retained from a signatory state by a
parent without the other’s permission must be returned promptly to the
original country of residence.

The convention can also help parents exercise visitation rights abroad.

Japan is not among the 80 signatories to the convention. When kids are
abducted to nonsignatory countries, it can take years to make any
progress, and sometimes all efforts are in vain.

Ottawa is dealing with more than 620 unresolved child-abduction and
custody-related cases, Bill Crosbie, the Canadian Foreign Affairs and
International Trade Department’s deputy minister for consular
services, said at the Canadian Embassy in Tokyo. Twenty-nine of them,
the highest number in any one country, are in Japan, he said.

The U.S. currently has 40 cases of international child abduction
involving Japan, the third-largest after Mexico and India, said
Kathleen Ruckman, deputy director of the U.S. State Department’s
Children’s Issues Office.

“What the Hague Convention is about to say (is) where the decision has
to be made about the child’s future,” said William Duncan, deputy
secretary general of the Hague Conference on Private International Law.

END OF STORY.

COMMENT:  Its interesting how the US government makes the intake requirements
for actual new cases to qualify as an “official” State Dept case of
child abduction to a foreign country in an effort to keep the numbers
low. But thank GOD that many people have met all of those criteria and
maintain the official cases with the Govt…same in Canada . Thanks to
the Govt of Canada for keeping the pressure on Japan!
Patrick B

ENDS

産經:「青い目の人形」に“市民権” 愛媛・西予市。Sankei: Old dolls get “City Citizenship”. Now how about NJ residents?

mytest

HANDBOOKsemifinalcover.jpgwelcomesticker.jpgFranca-color.jpg
Article below about old “blue-eyed dolls” getting shiminken, or “city citizenship”. Yet foreign residents and taxpayers can’t, anywhere in Japan. See what I mean–check out the Tama-Chan Case. Debito in Sapporo

「青い目の人形」に“市民権” 愛媛・西予市
産經新聞 2008.3.17 22:35
http://sankei.jp.msn.com/life/trend/080317/trd0803172234008-n1.htm

約80年ぶりに日本の“市民権”を得ることになった「青い目の人形」

 愛媛県西予市の市立狩江、俵津両小学校に保管されている「青い目の人形」3体が住民登録されることになり、18日、市役所の窓口で人形それぞれに特別住民票が交付される。日米友好の証として米国から日本に渡ってきた人形。昭和という激動の時代を経て約80年ぶりに“市民権”を得ることになった。

 人形が米国から日本に贈られた背景は、大正時代に米国への移民が急増したこと。親日家のギューリック博士が、全米で子供たちの手作りの人形を集め、日本の小学校に“親善大使”として贈る草の根運動を始めたのがきっかけとなった。

 昭和2年、米国から1万2000体余りの人形が日本に届けられ、全国の幼稚園や小学校に贈られた。返礼として同年のクリスマスに日本から58体の日本人形が横浜から海路、全米各州に届けられて大きく歓迎された。日米でやりとりした人形には名前が付けられ、当時はパスポートも所持していたという。

 しかし、第二次世界大戦で互いに敵視国となり、青い目の人形たちの大部分は焼かれたり捨てられたりして、愛媛県内では5体しか残っていなかった。

 このうち3体が西予市の2小学校で大切に保管されてきた。名前は「ピッティ」「ノーマ」「フランセッタ」。18日、市役所を訪れる両校児童らの申請に基づき、3体の人形に特別住民票が交付される。

 西予市では7月、青い目の人形を題材に地元の子供たちも出演する市民ミュージカル「青い瞳を忘れない」が上演されることになっており、このミュージカルの実行委が住民登録を提案した。人形を米国へ里帰りさせる計画も進めている。
ENDS

FEEDBACK:
Hi Debito,

You might remember me… I did some translating for the whole Tama-chan thing way back when, and since then have been very tuned in to whole issue of Koseki and jumnihyo, esp because I am an NJ with Japanese PR and a Japanese husband.

So it was especially upsetting to come home from work today and hear that Seiyo City (nearby) has issued Juminhyo to two dolls. 青い目の人形へ特別交付住民票 I believe, I just caught the tail end of the news. I think the dolls were gifts from America (?) to Japan after WWII, and there are two of these dolls left in Seiyo. Yes, they are probably antiques, of great historic value and probably represent something important in the relationship between Japan and America.

But for me, after 12 years living in Japan, 9 years as the wife of a Japanese national, and esp recently having to translate our koseki and juminhyou and feeling very frustrated at not being listed anywhere on my husband’s juminhyo, I find this totally unacceptable, insulting, and frankly hurtful.

But wait, you know all that. So, what do you think I should do? Call the Ehime Prefectural Newspaper? Draft an official letter of protest and send it to the Seiyo City Hall? Any advice would be appreciated.

I think you are traveling, so you might not be able to get back to me soon. I am hoping there’ll be something in the newspaper tomorrow, and maybe something on line. If I can find any links, I’ll send them your way. And if it only appears in the newspaper, I will scan it in.

Sorry to trouble you when you are traveling. But I was so upset when I heard the news, and the first thing I thought was “I better contact Debito, he’ll know what to do.”
ENDS

US State Dept Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, 2007, Japan

mytest

HANDBOOKsemifinalcover.jpgwelcomesticker.jpgFranca-color.jpg

Hi Blog. Although the US is certainly no paragon of human rights worldwide (what with torture, renditions, abuses under SOFA, denial of Habeas Corpus to non-citizens, Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib, and the largest arms sales worldwide, to name but a few caveats under this administration), here is their annual report on human rights in Japan in full. For what it’s worth. Issues taken up in part by Debito.org in boldface.

Note how the situation of “Japanese Only” signs nationwide is no longer mentioned, like it was in previous reports. I guess the US State Department considers the situation resolved. I beg to differ. Arudou Debito in Sapporo

=======================================
Country Reports on Human Rights Practices – 2007 Japan
Released by the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor
March 11, 2008

http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2007/100522.htm
Courtesy of Ahmed

Japan is a parliamentary democracy with a population of approximately 127.7 million. Sovereignty is vested in the citizenry, and the emperor is defined as the symbol of state. On September 25, Yasuo Fukuda replaced Shinzo Abe as prime minister and head of a coalition composed of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) and the New Komeito Party. In elections on July 29, the Democratic Party of Japan ended the LDP’s half-century dominance of the Diet when it captured a majority in the upper house. The elections were generally considered free and fair. The civilian authorities generally maintained effective control of the security forces.

The government generally respected the rights of its citizens. There were some cases of violence and other abuse against women and children and of sexual harassment. Despite government efforts to combat human trafficking, it remained a problem. Employment discrimination against women occurred, and human rights nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) reported discrimination against ethnic and other minorities.

RESPECT FOR HUMAN RIGHTS

Section 1 Respect for the Integrity of the Person, Including Freedom From:

a. Arbitrary or Unlawful Deprivation of Life

There were no reports that the government or its agents committed arbitrary or unlawful killings.

b. Disappearance

There were no reports of politically motivated disappearances.

c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

The law prohibits such practices, and the government generally respected these provisions in practice. Unlike in past years, there were no reports of violence against prisoners or detainees.

At year’s end the civil case against three police officers convicted for the 2004 death of a suspect who was being held in a police detention center was still pending.

The government continued to deny death‑row inmates and their families information about the date of execution. Families of condemned prisoners were notified of the execution after the fact. Condemned prisoners, although held in solitary confinement for an average of seven years and five months until their execution, were allowed visits by their families and lawyers and, following revisions to penal regulations that took effect during the year, by other persons as well.

Prisoner rights NGOs reported that prison management regularly abused the rules on solitary confinement for prisoners. Although the Prison Law Enforcement Regulation stipulates the maximum time prisoners may be held in solitary confinement, it gives wardens broad leeway. Punitive solitary confinement may be imposed for a maximum of 60 days, but procedures allow wardens to keep prisoners in “isolation” solitary confinement indefinitely.

Prison and Detention Center Conditions

Prison conditions generally met international standards. However, several facilities were overcrowded, lacked heating, and provided inadequate food and medical care. NGOs reported that inmates in some institutions were given insufficient clothing and blankets to protect themselves against cold weather. In August two men in detention facilities that lacked air conditioning or fans died of heatstroke. NGOs, lawyers, and doctors criticized healthcare in prisons, police-operated preindictment detention centers, and immigration detention centers.

Unlike in past years, there were no reports of rape or brutality against prisoners.

Regulations do not require that minors be held separately from adults in immigration detention centers; however, unlike in past years there were no reports of minors being held in the same correctional or immigration detention facilities as adults. NGOs reported that the two 16-year-old Kurdish immigrants who had been held in an Ibaraki Prefecture immigration detention center alongside adults in 2006 had been granted provisional release, but their refugee applications were still pending.

Prison management regulations stipulate that independent committees inspect prisons and detention centers operated by the Ministry of Justice. These committees included physicians, lawyers, local municipal officials, NGO representatives, and other local citizens. Prisoner rights advocates reported that the committees visited Ministry of Justice prisons throughout the year. In June the committees began inspecting police‑operated detention centers as well. There was no independent inspection regime for immigration detention centers. Human rights NGOs reported that in comparison to past years, there appeared to be an increased flow of correspondence in and out of prisons.

In May the UN Committee Against Torture (UNCAT) criticized immigration detention centers for alleged violence, the unlawful use of restraining devices, sexual harassment, and lack of access to healthcare. UNCAT also criticized the lack of an independent monitor of immigration detention centers.

d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention

The law prohibits arbitrary arrest and detention, and the government generally observed these prohibitions.

Role of the Police and Security Apparatus

Civilian authorities maintained effective control over the National Police Agency (NPA) and local police forces, and the government has effective mechanisms to investigate and punish abuse and corruption. There were no reports of impunity involving the security forces during the year. However, some NGOs criticized local public safety commissions for lacking independence from or sufficient authority over police agencies.

Arrest and Detention

Persons were apprehended openly with warrants based on sufficient evidence and issued by a duly authorized official, and detainees were brought before an independent judiciary.

The law provides detainees the right to a prompt judicial determination of the legality of the detention, and authorities respected this right in practice. The law requires authorities to inform detainees immediately of the charges against them. Authorities usually held suspects in police‑operated detention centers for an initial 72 hours. A judge must interview a suspect prior to further detention. The judge may extend pre‑indictment custody by up to two consecutive 10‑day periods. Prosecutors routinely sought and received these extensions. Prosecutors may also apply for an additional five‑day extension.

The code of criminal procedure allows detainees, their families, or representatives to request that the court release an indicted detainee on bail. However, bail was not available preindictment to persons detained in police‑operated detention centers.

Unlike in past years, preindictment detainees had access to counsel, including court‑appointed attorneys, but prisoner advocates said that in practice this access was limited both in duration and frequency. Counsel may not be present during interrogations at any time. Family members were allowed to meet with detainees, but only in the presence of a detention officer.

e. Denial of Fair Public Trial

The law provides for an independent judiciary, and the government generally respected judicial independence in practice.

There are several levels of courts, including family and summary courts, district courts, high courts, and the Supreme Court, which serves as the court of final appeal.

Trial Procedures

The law provides the right to a fair trial for all citizens and ensures that each charged individual receives a public trial by an independent civilian court, has access to defense counsel, and has the right to cross‑examine witnesses. A defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, and defendants cannot be compelled to testify against themselves.

UNCAT, NGOs, and lawyers questioned whether defendants were presumed innocent in practice. According to legal advocacy NGOs, the majority of detainees who were indicted confessed while in police custody. Safeguards exist to ensure that suspects cannot be compelled to confess to a crime or be convicted when a confession is the only evidence, but a manual of police interrogation procedures showed that police investigators are authorized to use heavy pressure to extract confessions. The use of police-operated detention centers, which puts suspects in the custody of their interrogators, has been on the rise for more than 30 years. According to government statistics, more than 98 percent of arrested suspects were sent to police detention facilities. The other 2 percent were held in Ministry of Justice-operated preindictment detention centers. More than 99 percent of cases that reached a trial court resulted in conviction.

During the year there were widespread media reports of persons convicted on the basis of police-obtained confessions, who were later proved innocent. In January the Toyama prefectural police and District Public Prosecutor’s Office admitted that a man had been wrongly convicted and served 25 months in prison based on “insufficient” evidence. In August the Supreme Public Prosecutor’s Office released a report acknowledging that investigators sometimes placed too much emphasis on confessions and recommending measures to prevent false charges.

Trial procedures favor the prosecution. Although the law provides for access to counsel, a significant number of defendants reported that this access was insufficient. The law does not require full disclosure by prosecutors, and material that the prosecution does not use in court may be suppressed. The legal representatives of some defendants claimed that they did not receive access to relevant material in the police record.

The language barrier was a serious problem for foreign defendants. No guidelines existed to ensure effective communication between judges, lawyers, and non‑Japanese‑speaking defendants. No standard licensing or qualification system existed for court interpreters, and trials proceeded even if no translation or interpretation was provided to the accused. Several foreign detainees claimed that police urged them to sign statements in Japanese that they could not read and that were not translated adequately.

Political Prisoners and Detainees

There were no reports of political prisoners or detainees.

Civil Judicial Procedures and Remedies

There is an independent and impartial judiciary in civil matters. Cases involving human rights violations have been brought before these courts.

f. Arbitrary Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence

The law prohibits such actions, and the government generally respected these prohibitions in practice.

Section 2 Respect for Civil Liberties, Including:

a. Freedom of Speech and Press

The law provides for freedom of speech and of the press, and the government generally respected these rights in practice. An independent press, an effective judiciary, and a functioning democratic political system combined to ensure freedom of speech and of the press.

Internet Freedom

There were no government restrictions on access to the Internet or reports that the government monitored e‑mail or Internet chat rooms. Individuals and groups could engage in the peaceful expression of views via the Internet, including by e‑mail.

Academic Freedom and Cultural Events

There were no government restrictions on academic freedom or cultural events. The requirement for Ministry of Education approval of history textbooks has been a subject of controversy, particularly regarding the treatment of certain subjects pertaining to the 20th century.

b. Freedom of Peaceful Assembly and Association

The law provides for the freedom of assembly and association, and the government generally respected these rights in practice.

c. Freedom of Religion

The law provides for freedom of religion, and the government generally respected this right in practice.

Societal Abuses and Discrimination

Relations among religious groups were generally amicable. An estimated 200 Jewish families lived in the country. There were no reports of anti‑Semitic acts.

For a more detailed discussion, see the 2007 International Religious Freedom Report.

d. Freedom of Movement, Internally Displaced Persons, Protection of Refugees, and Stateless Persons

The law provides for freedom of movement within the country, foreign travel, emigration, and repatriation, and the government generally respected these rights in practice.

The law prohibits forced exile, and the government did not use it.

Protection of Refugees

The law provides for the granting of asylum or refugee status in accordance with the 1951 UN Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 protocol, and the government has established a system for providing protection to refugees.

In practice the government provided some protection against refoulement, the return of persons to a country where there is reason to believe they feared persecution. However, in May UNCAT noted that Japanese law does not expressly prohibit deportation to countries where there is a risk of torture. In addition, UNCAT criticized the lack of an independent body to review applications for refugee status, the fact that the Ministry of Justice does not allow applicants for refugee status to select legal representatives for appeal, and the restrictions on government legal assistance for nonresidents. UNCAT, NGOs, and lawyers criticized the indefinite and often long period of detention between the rejection of an application for asylum and deportation.

The government granted refugee status or asylum in only a small number of cases. Of 959 claims submitted to the Ministry of Justice in 2006, the government granted refugee status to 34 persons. The country also provided temporary protection to 53 individuals who did not qualify as refugees under either the 1951 convention or the 1967 protocol. The government did not accept any refugees for resettlement during the year.

Refugees faced the same patterns of discrimination that ethnic minorities did in the country: reduced access to housing, education, and employment. Persons whose refugee status was pending or on appeal did not have the legal right to work or receive social welfare, rendering them completely dependent on overcrowded government shelters or the support of NGOs.

The government cooperated with the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees and other humanitarian organizations in assisting refugees and asylum seekers.

Section 3 Respect for Political Rights: The Right of Citizens to Change Their Government

The law provides citizens the right to change their government peacefully, and citizens exercised this right in practice through periodic, free, and fair elections based on universal suffrage.

Elections and Political Participation

In July the country held elections for the upper house of the Diet. The elections were considered generally free and fair.

Political parties operated without restriction or outside interference.

Women held 45 of 480 seats in the lower house of the Diet and 43 of the upper house’s 242 seats. At year’s end there were five female governors. There were two women in the 18‑member cabinet. Because some ethnic minorities are of mixed heritage and do not self-identify, it was difficult to determine the number of minorities that served in the Diet. In the past an Ainu served in the upper house, and currently some Diet members are naturalized citizens.

Government Corruption and Transparency

The law provides criminal penalties for official corruption, and the government generally implemented these laws effectively. There were several reports of government corruption during the year. According to NPA figures for 2006, there were 74 cases involving bribery and 42 cases of bid rigging, compared with 65 for bribery and 17 for bid rigging during 2005. There were regular media reports of financial accounting scandals involving politicians and government officials.

The public has the legal right to access government information. There were no reports that the government denied legal requests for information or required information seekers to pay prohibitive fees to gain access.

Section 4 Governmental Attitude Regarding International and Nongovernmental Investigation of Alleged Violations of Human Rights

A number of domestic and international human rights groups generally operated without governmental restriction, investigating and publishing their findings on human rights cases. Government officials generally were cooperative and responsive to their views.

Section 5 Discrimination, Societal Abuses, and Trafficking in Persons

The law prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, [sic–there is no law against racial discrimination in Japan] gender, disability, language, and social status. Although the government generally enforced these provisions, discrimination against women, ethnic minority groups, and foreigners remained a problem.

Women

The law criminalizes all forms of rape, including spousal rape, and the government generally enforced the law effectively. According to government statistics, 1,948 rapes were reported in 2006, and 153 persons were convicted for rape, and six persons for gang rape. Many police stations had female officers to provide confidential assistance to female victims.

Although prohibited by law, domestic violence against women remained a problem. District courts may impose six‑month restraining orders on perpetrators of domestic violence and impose sentences of up to one year in prison or fines of up to $8,500 (one million yen). In 2006 courts granted 2,208 out of 2,759 petitions for protection orders. The law, which covers common‑law marriages and divorced individuals, was amended in July to include protection not only for victims of abuse but also for persons threatened with violence. According to NPA statistics, in 2006 there were 18,236 reported cases of domestic violence. Spousal violence consultation assistance centers reported 57,088 consultation cases in 2006.

Prostitution is illegal but widespread. Domestic sex tourism was not a significant problem.

Sexual harassment in the workplace remained widespread. In fiscal year (FY) 2006 the Ministry of Health, Labor, and Welfare (MHLW) received 11,102 reports of such harassment. The law includes measures to identify companies that failed to prevent sexual harassment, but it does not include punitive measures to enforce compliance other than publicizing the names of offending companies. The government established hot lines and designated ombudsmen to handle complaints of discrimination and sexual harassment.

The law prohibits sexual discrimination and provides women the same rights as men. A Council for Gender Equality existed to monitor enforcement; its high‑level members included the chief cabinet secretary, cabinet ministers, and Diet members. During the year the council regularly met to examine policies and monitor progress on gender equality.

Inequality in employment remained entrenched in society. Women composed 41.5 percent of the labor force, and their average monthly wage was $1,988 (222,600 yen), less than two‑thirds of the monthly wage earned by men ($3,015, or 337,700 yen). A June Cabinet Office report showed that among developed countries Japan ranked extremely low in the number of women serving in leadership roles in management or politics.

The issue of “comfort women,” or women forced into sexual slavery for Japanese troops in World War II, continued to draw controversy. In 1995 the government established the Asian Women’s Fund (AWF), which sent a signed apology from the prime minister along with privately raised financial compensation to each victim. Critics of the policy towards comfort women maintained that the apology letter from the prime minister took moral but not legal responsibility for the suffering endured by the comfort women, and called for the government to pay direct compensation.

Children

The government was committed to the rights and welfare of children, and in general children’s rights were protected adequately.

Public school education is provided for up to 12 years. Education is free and compulsory through the lower secondary level (age 15 or the ninth grade). Education was widely available to students who met minimum academic standards at the upper secondary level through age 18. Society placed an extremely high value on education, and enrollment levels for both boys and girls through the upper secondary level exceeded 94.4 percent, according to the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology. There were no differences in the treatment of girls and boys at any level of school.

The government provides universal health care for all citizens, including children.

Reports of child abuse continued to increase at an alarming rate. In FY 2006 there were 37,343 reported cases of child abuse by parents or guardians. According to the NPA, 59 children died in FY 2006 after being abused. The law grants child welfare officials the authority to prohibit abusive parents from meeting or communicating with their children. The law also bans abuse under the guise of discipline and mandates that anyone aware of suspicious circumstances must report the information to a nationwide local child‑counseling center or municipal welfare center.

The law does not criminalize the possession of child pornography, which often depicted the brutal sexual abuse of small children. The absence of a statutory basis makes it difficult for police to obtain search warrants, preventing them from effectively enforcing existing child pornography laws or participating in international law enforcement efforts in this area. Along with child pornography involving real victims, child molesters used cartoons and comics depicting child pornography to seduce children. Internet Service Providers in Japan acknowledged that the country has become a hub for child pornography, leading to greater victimization of children both domestically and abroad.

Trafficking in Persons

The law establishes human trafficking both for sexual and labor exploitation as a criminal offense.

Nonetheless, human trafficking remained a significant problem despite government efforts, including stricter requirements for entertainment visas and more aggressive investigation and prosecution of offenders. The country remained a destination and transit country for men, women, and children trafficked for commercial sexual exploitation and other purposes. Victims came from China, the Republic of Korea, Southeast Asia, Eastern Europe, and to a lesser extent Latin America. There were also reports of internal trafficking of girls for sexual exploitation.

Brokers in the countries of origin recruited women and sold them to intermediaries or employers, who in turn subjected them to debt bondage and coercion. Agents, brokers, and employers involved in trafficking for sexual exploitation often had connections with organized crime.

Most women trafficked into the sex trade had their travel documents taken away and their movements strictly controlled by their employers. Victims were threatened with reprisals to themselves or their families if they tried to escape. Employers often isolated the women, subjected them to constant surveillance, and used violence to punish them for disobedience. NGOs reported that in some cases brokers used drugs to subjugate victims.

Debt bondage was another means of control. Before arrival in the country, trafficking victims generally did not understand the size of the debts they would owe, the amount of time it would take them to repay the debts, or the conditions of employment to which they would be subjected upon arrival. Women typically faced debts of $26,000 to $43,000 (three million to five million yen). In addition, they had to pay their employer for their living expenses, medical care (when provided by the employer), and other necessities. “Fines” for misbehavior added to the original debt and the process that employers used to calculate these debts was not transparent. Employers also sometimes “resold,” or threatened to resell, troublesome women or women found to be HIV positive, thereby increasing the victims’ debts and often leading to even worse working conditions.

In response to increased police enforcement, many sex business operators shifted from store-front businesses to “delivery” escort services. This made it much harder to measure the extent to which employers were exploiting victims of trafficking.

NGOs and the media reported abuses of the “foreign trainee” program, a government-sponsored training program supervised by the Japan International Training Cooperation Organization. In some companies, trainees reportedly were forced to work unpaid overtime and made less than the minimum wage. Moreover, their wages were automatically deposited in company‑controlled accounts, despite the fact that “forced deposits” are illegal. According to labor rights NGOs, trainees sometimes had their travel documents taken from them and their movement controlled to “prevent escape.” A government review of the program was ongoing, and in December the Ministry of Justice amended the guidelines governing organizations that accept trainees and interns to prevent further abuses.

There were significant improvements in the country’s prosecution of trafficking offenders. In 2006, 78 trafficking suspects were arrested, 17 cases prosecuted, and 15 trafficking offenders convicted under the trafficking statute. This was a significant increase from the few prosecutions and one conviction obtained in 2005. Of the 15 convictions in 2006, 12 offenders received prison sentences ranging from one to seven years; three offenders received suspended sentences.

The NPA oversaw significant improvements in police handling of trafficking cases and identification of victims. Nevertheless, there continued to be reports that police and immigration officers failed to identify victims adequately. For example, NGOs reported that police and immigration officers occasionally neglected to classify women working in exploitative conditions as victims because they willingly entered the country to work illegally.

The MHLW encouraged police and immigration officers to use its preexisting network of shelters for domestic violence victims as temporary housing for foreign trafficking victims awaiting repatriation. The government paid for victims’ medical care and subsidized repatriation through a grant to the International Organization for Migration (IOM). The MHLW reported that in FY 2006, 36 women were protected in private and public shelters, and IOM representatives helped 41 women return home with the government’s support.

Typically, government shelters lacked the resources needed to provide adequate services to trafficking victims. NGO shelters that specialized in assisting victims of human trafficking had full‑time staff able to speak seven or more languages, but the MHLW shelters had to rely on interpretation services from outside providers. Without sufficient counseling in their native language by professionals familiar with the special needs of trafficking victims, foreign women staying at government shelters elected to repatriate as quickly as possible. Although the government reserved funds to subsidize victims’ stays in private shelters, the majority of victims were referred to public shelters.

Persons with Disabilities

The law prohibits discrimination against persons with physical and mental disabilities in employment, education, and access to health care, and the government generally enforced these provisions effectively. The government supported the right of persons with disabilities to participate in civic affairs.

Persons with disabilities were not generally subject to overt discrimination in employment, education, or provision of other state services; however, in practice they faced limited access to these services. Persons with disabilities made up less than 0.2 percent of university students.

The law mandates that the government and private companies hire minimum proportions of persons with disabilities (including mental disabilities). Companies with more than 300 employees that do not comply must pay a fine of $425 (50,000 yen) per vacant position per month. Public employment of persons with disabilities exceeded the minimum, but according to MHLW statistics the private sector lagged in spite of increases over last year.

In December 2006 revisions to accessibility laws mandated that new construction projects for public use must include provisions for persons with disabilities. In addition, the government allows operators of hospitals, theaters, hotels, and other public‑use facilities to receive low‑interest loans and tax benefits if they upgrade or install features to accommodate persons with disabilities.

National/Racial/Ethnic Minorities

Burakumin (descendants of feudal era “outcasts”) and ethnic minorities experienced varying degrees of societal discrimination. The approximately three million burakumin, although not subject to governmental discrimination, frequently were victims of entrenched societal discrimination, including restricted access to housing, education, and employment opportunities. NGOs reported that discrimination was still extensive outside major metropolitan areas.

Despite legal safeguards against discrimination, the country’s large populations of Korean, Chinese, Brazilian, and Filipino permanent residents–many of whom were born, raised, and educated in Japan–were subject to various forms of deeply entrenched societal discrimination, including restricted access to housing, education, and employment opportunities. There was a widespread perception among citizens that “foreigners,” often members of Japan‑born ethnic minorities, were responsible for most of the crimes committed in the country. The media fostered this perception although Ministry of Justice statistics showed that the “foreigner”‑committed crime rate, excepting crimes like illegal entry and overstay, was lower than the crime rate for citizens.

Many immigrants struggled to overcome obstacles to naturalization, including the broad discretion available to adjudicating officers and the great emphasis on Japanese‑language ability. Aliens with five years of continuous residence are eligible for naturalization and citizenship rights. Naturalization procedures also require an extensive background check, which includes inquiries into the applicant’s economic status and assimilation into society. The government defended its naturalization procedures as necessary to ensure the smooth assimilation of foreigners into society.

Indigenous People

The 1997 Law for the Promotion of the Ainu Culture and Dissemination and Advocacy for the Traditions of the Ainu and the Ainu Culture (Culture Promotion Law) recognized the Ainu as an ethnic minority, required all prefectural governments to develop basic programs for promoting Ainu culture and traditions, canceled previous laws that discriminated against the Ainu, and required the government of Hokkaido to return Ainu communal assets. Although the Ainu enjoyed the same rights as all other citizens, when clearly identifiable as Ainu they faced the same patterns of discrimination that all ethnic minorities encountered.

Other Societal Abuses and Discrimination

There were no reports of societal violence or discrimination based on sexual orientation or against persons with HIV/AIDS.

Section 6 Worker Rights

a. The Right of Association

The law allows workers to form and join unions of their choice without previous authorization or excessive requirements, and the government effectively enforced the law. Unions were free of government control and influence; however, public service employees’ basic union rights, governed by a separate law, are considerably restricted in ways that” effectively require prior authorization” to form unions. Approximately 18 percent of the total workforce was unionized in 2006.

b. The Right to Organize and Bargain Collectively

Except for public sector workers and employees of state‑owned enterprises, the law allows unions to conduct their activities without interference, and the government protected this right. Collective bargaining is protected by law and was freely practiced. Unions have the right to strike, and workers exercised this right in practice.

There are no export processing zones.

c. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor

The law prohibits forced or compulsory labor, including by children; however, there were reports that such practices occurred. Labor rights NGOs alleged that some companies forced foreign laborers to work illegal overtime, refused to pay them allowances, controlled their movement and travel documents, and forced them to deposit paychecks into company-controlled accounts. The law and Ministry of Justice guidelines prohibit these practices.

d. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment

The law bans the exploitation of children in the workplace, and the government effectively implemented the law. The MHLW is responsible for enforcement. By law, children between the ages of 15 and 18 may perform any job that is not designated as dangerous or harmful. Children between the ages of 13 and 15 may perform “light labor” only, and children under 13 may work only in the entertainment industry. Other than victims of human trafficking and child pornography, child labor was not a problem.

e. Acceptable Conditions of Work

Minimum wages are set on a prefectural and industry basis, with the input of tripartite (workers, employers, and public interest) advisory councils. Employers covered by a minimum wage must post the concerned minimum wages, and compliance with minimum wages was considered widespread. Minimum wage rates ranged, according to prefecture, from $5.74 (618 yen) to $6.54 (739 yen) per hour. The minimum daily wage provided a decent standard of living for a worker and family.

The law provides for a 40‑hour workweek for most industries and mandates premium pay for hours worked above 40 in a week or eight in a day. However, it was widely accepted within the population that workers, including those in government jobs, routinely exceeded the hours outlined in the law. Labor unions frequently criticized the government for failing to enforce maximum working hour regulations.

According to the Trade Union Confederation, companies increasingly hire workers on a part-time, non-regular basis. Such workers reportedly made up one-third of the labor force, and worked for lower wages, enduring insecure working conditions. Temporary employees reportedly also faced the same unfair working conditions. Activist groups claimed that employers exploited illegal foreign workers, who often had little or no knowledge of the Japanese language or their legal rights.

The government sets occupational health and safety standards, and the Ministry of Labor effectively administered the various laws and regulations governing occupational health and safety. Labor inspectors have the authority to suspend unsafe operations immediately, and the law provides that workers may voice concerns over occupational safety and remove themselves from unsafe working conditions without jeopardizing their continued employment.

REPORT ENDS

Rough Guide on what to do if and when arrested in Japan

mytest

HANDBOOKsemifinalcover.jpgwelcomesticker.jpgFranca-color.jpg
Hi Blog. From someone with experience. Name and nationality withheld at author’s request. Arudou Debito

===================================

Rough guide to police arrest in Japan
By Anonymous

The real earthquake

In Japan, earthquakes can hit anyone, any time. They do not come announced. There are many guidebooks and government leaflets that prepare you for the big bang and tell you what to do if.

In Japan, police can arrest anyone, any time. They do not come announced. There are no government leaflets that prepare you for the catastrophe. So, I wrote this one instead, compiled from my own painful experience and those of many other foreigners in Japan.
The actual chances to be arrested in Japan are much higher than the chances to be hurt by an earthquake in Japan – especially if you are a foreigner. Don’t think that you will be able to deal with it just because “you know your rights” from back home or from Hollywood court movies. Japan is not about justice, it is about bustice. So prepare yourself for the real big bang – read this.

Advice in a nutshell

Do not get involved.
Memorize telephone numbers NOW.
Don’t talk, don’t sign – anything.
Insist on your rights to contact people.
And finally:
You cannot make your situation worse – they already put you in the worst situation possible.

Do not get involved

Do not get involved with the police, or with other people’s problems. That is the golden rule to avoid being arrested in the first place. In Japan, police can arrest anybody without a reason, and if a foreigner is involved, they tend to arrest the foreigner.

 Do not get violent: Many foreigners get arrested because they got violent, namely because they got mingled up in fights. So, even if some asshole provokes you; while in Japan: control your temper, give in and never get physical by any means. Instead, take some revenge in thinking how the small the other guy’s penis is.

 Don’t call the police yourself. Think twice before calling or involving the police even if you are the victim of a crime. However clear the facts might seem to you – by your virtue of being non-Japanese, you are automatically a suspect, too.

 Do not help strangers. This is a harsh advice for Western altruists. But again, keep in mind that in a suspicious situation, you as the foreigner, are the suspect by default. I once tried to intervene when I saw a guy who had the chutzpa to beat up his wife in the open street. When I interfered, they both suddenly started beating up me instead because it turned out they were both piss-drunk. This aroused the attention of the nearby koban police: they took all three of us to the koban and as it was 2:1, police ended up demanding that I apologize to the couple. So do not ask the cute, drunk girl, who is puking at the side of the street, if she is OK – her nearby friends might just take out their frustration on you and accuse you of trying to rape her, for example.

 Avoid bad odds. Be especially careful, when you are just by yourself, and the other party consists of several people, who might afterwards give each other false alibis. Also, it goes without saying that if the other party is Japanese, police tend to believe them more.

 Don’t be a good citizen. The police will ask you (politely) to do something only when they do not have (yet) the grounds to force you to do the same thing. They drag you by force to the koban as soon as they see you getting in trouble. On the other hand, they ask you to come to the koban “to talk about it” only when they have nothing yet justifying to drag you. They will come directly to your apartment and break the door if they have a warrant or a specific complaint. On the other hand, they will wait downstairs and ask you via interphone if they may come up only if they have nothing yet. Complying with their request does not mean you are proving to be a good citizen, but it means you are helping them to build a case against you. Never comply; instead ask them for the concrete reason “Go-you-wa nani-desu¬-ka?” and if they don’t tell you or just say, we will tell you at the koban, tell them you will not do shit unless they tell you here and now and walk away slowly (or don’t open the door) . They cannot hold you back, because if they had grounds for that, they would have dragged you to the koban in the first place.

 Play the dumb gaijin, especially, when the situation seems to escalate: Smile broadly and constantly to all participants (police and adversaries), talk only English or your native language in a friendly tone, say “Sorry” or “Sumimasen”, at whatever they say or shout at you and bow every time. Police have been known to let gaijin go simply because of the hassle of dealing with them.

 Film them. If you see the situation worsening and especially if you are on your own: Take out your mobile phone and film your conversation with the police. Ask them in front of the camera what they want, what the grounds are for hassling you and what their name and affiliation is. They will probably not answer any of this, but the presence of a camera has a controlling effect. As long as they don’t formally arrest you, they can’t touch (and take away your phone). Even if they do and then infallibly delete the video, IT geeks should be able recover that video once you get your phone back.

Memorize telephone numbers NOW.

Memorize telephone numbers NOW. Arrest will in most cases come over you as a complete surprise; sometimes, you will not even have the chance of taking out your cell phone and tell your partner or friends about it. Once in prison, obviously, you will not be able to access your phone’s address book, either. This said, the prison staff (not the investigators) normally do call people for you whenever you ask them to do so (nicely). But they don’t look up numbers for you. So you need to know telephone numbers by heart – memorize them TODAY.
The most important number is the number of a lawyer. If you don’t know one, get yourself acquainted with one right now. Most embassies provide a list of lawyers, for example.
Also, you should memorize the numbers of friends, partners, family – who live in Japan – among them preferably people who have landline telephones (staff sometimes refuses to call mobile phones), and who speak some Japanese. Being able to contact your friends is important from the very beginning because you need somebody outside who will pay the lawyer his initial fees (between 150.000 and 300.000 yen).

Don’t sign, don’t talk.

As soon as you are formally arrested, the main suspect is YOU. They are not questioning you to find out more about the truth, they are interrogating you only to gather more evidence against you. That is why the core rule is: Do not make any statements about the crime, and do not sign any statement (signing is done by your fingerprints, so don’t fingerprint anything). Despite what police or prosecutor or even your lawyer might tell you: Signing doesn’t get you out faster; it will help keeping you inside longer.

Signing is the grand prize for them

In most cases, the evidence the police have is ridiculously thin, even if your file seems to have a lot of pages (Typically, most of the pages are just filled with dozens or hundreds of photos of the so-called crime scene, one picture per page) So, in many cases, they have no “proof” at all, except for the statements of (Japanese) witnesses and “victims”.

This is why your signed statement is the grand prize to them. Even if you don’t confess explicitly to having committed the crime: In the Japanese justice system, you will be convicted of the crime as soon as you make a signed statement about it. No further “proof” will then be considered necessary.

On the other hand, it will be difficult for prosecution/judge to further detain you without having any statement of your side.

Just don’t talk at all. Even if you refuse signing what you said, the police officer and the prosecutor are writing down rough summaries of what you say during interrogation and will add that to your file. It is legally less relevant, but it will nevertheless be seen by the prosecutor and by the judge.

A second reason for you to keep your mouth shut tight: If you tell them about the loopholes in their reasoning, they will not let you go, but they will close the loopholes. So telling them convincing reasons or tell them about evidence that would prove that you are innocent, only makes them look harder for counter-evidence, or worse, invites them to alter the statement of the victim or tamper with the evidence they have.

What you sign is what they said, not what you said

What you sign will never be what you said anyway. Investigator or prosecutor do not bother writing down your statement word by word; they take notes while you talk and then reformulate (or reinterpret generously) what you “meant”, using their own wordings. It is this re-enactment of what you said that they will want to you to sign (and which will count in court). You can be sure that they will insert all the legal keywords to make sure you are busted. Add to that the language barrier, and you see how little your influence is on what you sign.

Psychological spiel

It is of course very difficult to stay silent and to not make any statements for the whole period of 20 days in detention. This is precisely the reason why detention in Japan is so long. They say it is so long to allow for “collecting additional proof” but in fact, it is so long to increase the pressure on you to make a statement day by day.

The whole situation can probably be compared to a playboy who is trying to absolutely get laid with a girl. He will alternate between being nice and threatening, he will say anything, promise anything, use every trick that has worked before. He won’t keep any of his promises after reaching the goal, of course. Now, this guy has not only a night in a club to convince the girl – he has three entire weeks. And in fact, he has kidnapped the girl and has her locked up in a dark room inside his house where nobody can hear her. He promises to release her if she just sleeps with him only once – this seems so easy a way out, but if she complies, he will just keep her locked up longer.

So, it is indeed very hard to keep your virginity (=not to sign a statement) in jail. It is said that more than 80% of arrestees in Japan end up signing a confession during detention. Here are some details of the psychological mechanics to prepare you for that. Many of them are well-advertised in TV and movies; you would be surprised how well they work in reality:

 “Defend yourself against unfair accusations” trap. You have never dealt with a situation like this before. They have. And they know that your instincts will advise you to handle this as a “unfair accusations”-scenario, a familiar situation you have been through a thousand times in your life with your parents, teachers, partners, bosses. The natural human reaction to a reproach is to defend yourself, to justify your actions, to tell them how it really was – by discussing their arguments one by one, admitting to some of the facts but justifying it with moral means, counter-accusing the other party or trying to convince them of your good intentions… You see where this is going? All this means talking, cooperating and eventually signing. Never forget that your real and only crime is to be a foreigner. There is no way you can refute that. So stick with Nelson’s rule: Never admit, never explain.

 Lies. Once you have started talking (what you should never do in the first place) they will constantly accuse you of lying and being contradictory. This again triggers the “unfair accusations”-reaction in most people, only making them talk more and more. In reality, it is them who are using lies, fake promises and false accusations as standard interrogation techniques. And they don’t feel bad about it a tiny bit.

 Good cop, bad cop. Often the prosecutor will take the part of the good “cop”, as opposed to the (bad) police. On the third day after you arrested, you will meet the prosecutor for the first time. He often appears to be the first civilized person after you have been through what was probably the two most horrible days in your life. In my case, the prosecutor looked through my file and then gave me an astonished look and said: “I cannot understand why they had to lock you up for this!” smiling sympathetically and telling me about his close friend in my home country while afterwards it turned out he was the one who signed the arrest warrant in the first place. Still, you start thinking, after all those brute policemen, finally somebody who understands me, so you start explaining your point of view – and before you can say “chigau”, you will see him dictating “your” statement to his secretary.

 Little treats. Most of the day you are locked up in a tiny cell lying on the carpet and staring at the yellow walls. You will start welcoming anything that gets you out of that monotony, including the interrogations by the police detective. Firstly, there is a person that speaks your language – even though it is only the interpreter! Then, the officer will offer you real coffee or tea (in prison, the only liquids you get are water and miso soup). And you may smoke as much as you want (in prison, only 2 cigarettes per day, after breakfast). So the interrogation puts you at ease – and some people will just keep on talking (=making statements) to be able to smoke another cigarette.

 Feeling of guilt. You are being treated like scum – for a reason: They want you to start feeling like scum.
But it is them who are scum, by the way they are treating you. And even if you have indeed done something bad – their inhuman, brutal, unfair and undemocratic way annihilates any of their rights to superior morality – they are at least as bad as you are. Plus, in many cases, they wouldn’t lock up a Japanese national for the same “crime”, and, in a democracy, your case probably wouldn’t be considered a crime in the first place.

They sometimes remind you of your “promises” to tell them the truth – don’t feel obliged to your promises, don’t feel obliged to do anything. They do not deserve to be treated like a fellow human, because they don’t treat you like one.

 Promises and threats. They have a standard catalogue of promises and threats all with one goal: To make you sing and sign. On the promise side they offer you: a quick release, a mild sentence, a “deal”, they will offer to talk in your favor to judge/prosecutor, or to let you see the evidence (in reality, they will never let a suspect see the evidence; not even your lawyer may see the evidence before you are formally charged),. On the threats side you will encounter: They make you think of your responsibilities to your people outside. They will tell you they can keep you locked up forever. They will tell you that they have new/stronger/undoubtable evidence (which, again, you will never be shown). Also, they notice immediately if you want or fear something specific and turn that into another vain promise or threat. Just ignore what they are saying from the start because they may sound dramatic but it is all just tactics and lies.

 Cooperation. In short: Don’t cooperate. It is a long way from you being stubborn and refusing to talk at all to you signing the statement. This way is called “cooperation”, they have 20 long days to put you on the track, and they will infallibly ask you to cooperate (kyoryoku) fifty times a day. It starts with innocent things like “What is the profession of your parents?” where you might think, well telling him that cannot do me any harm. But keep in mind that every step of cooperation is a step towards making you sign the statement. It goes more or less like this: “Now that you have come this far, you might as well sign it, right?!”

In Japanese (justice system) eyes, cooperation means that you are showing signs of weakness, that they can lead you all the way up to the signing of the statement, and in the end, it means that you are guilty. This is why a very lenient judge might not even need a signed statement to find you guilty – any indication that you have cooperated with them will be interpreted as a hint that you are guilty.

 Be a pain in the ass – it won’t harm you. So instead of being cooperative, be stubborn from the start. There is a lot of signing (=fingerprinting), especially at the beginning. Start being strong by not signing anything, not even the form that states the number and content of the belongings they take from you when they arrest you. They cannot force your thumb down and fake a sign because you might claim they hurt you and complain with your embassy (that’s precisely why they do things like that with Japanese prisoners who have no embassy).

On the second day, refuse what they will present as a “necessary” routine to you: Taking your mugshots and fingerprints. If you comply with that, the next thing they will present as a routine is asking for a sample of your DNA (which is absolutely voluntary).
After having refused to sign at least a dozen papers during my first 24 hours in jail, on the second day, they came up with a search warrant for my house and they said: “We will open it with your house key from the things that you had on you but you have to sign a release form to allow us to use it” – power play time.

I asked: “What happens if I don’t sign?” They said: “We will have to open the door by force and leave it like that” – openly threatening me that they would leave my apartment visibly open for the next weeks that I was not there. So I took the warrant, and I signed but I added, in Japanese, below the signature: “Forced to sign under threats”. As soon as the police officer saw me writing that, he took the paper away from me, tore it into pieces and yelled to the others: “Let’s go and break the door with without the key.”
When I was finally released, I expected the worst. Only then, they told me they had actually notified the janitor when they broke in. The janitor had set up a provisional door lock right away that was not distinguishable from a real door lock.

 Right to remain silent. If you do not answer any of the interrogator’s questions, he will tell you that, in Japan, you only have the right to remain silent in case your statement would incriminate you. So he will infallibly ask you if the answer would actually incriminate you. This is a mean, double-bind game: you answer, you lose, you refuse to answer, you lose, too. So don’t play their game at all – just remain silent and there is nothing they can do about it. If you want to respond, respond every single time that you refuse to say anything because your human rights are violated, because you have no lawyer present or because Japan is no democracy or because he has bad breath.

Don’t be intimated by him scribbling or typing a lot while he has these one-way-conversations with you – if you don’t say anything, he will just have to copy-and-paste your refusal every single time. At the end of the “interrogation”, he will still ask to you sign the document (to confirm that you have said nothing). You will refuse that too (because, remember, never sign anything!), then he will ask you a last time why you refused to sign and you will just stay silent again to that.

 Don’t apologize. You will be reminded countless times how much the so-called victim has suffered from the crime. And then you will be asked if you don’t feel sorry at all for the victim. Don’t feel sorry and don’t comment on that! The only person you have to care for at this moment is you and nobody else.

If you start showing the slightest pity for the victim, they will pressure you into signing or writing a letter of apology – both of which are, in the eyes of any Japanese judge, the next best thing to a “real” confession.

By the way, even lawyers get trapped in this ruse. Your lawyer might advise you with good intentions that for reaching a deal with the victim (and the victim subsequently withdrawing the complaint), you must first show that you feel sorry for your crime. It is true that reaching a deal with the victim is in most cases the best way out – but you have to stay one step ahead of the police. Check out the notes on “Getting out” below for details.

 Slips of the tongue. It is definitely hard to refuse to say anything for three entire weeks – you will be questioned at least five or six full days from morning to evening out of that time.

The officer will sometimes start to deviate from the subject and start talking about your family, your life in Japan etc. Don’t be mistaken – he is the last person in the world who is interested in that (and who has a right to know about your private life). It is just a ruse to put you at ease and to make you talkative. Remember: He is not “actually a nice guy”, but he is your biggest enemy.

If you think your silence is going to crumble, you could deal with the situation and fill the time with asking HIM questions, how he feels working for such a shitty system, ask him about his grand-mother or hometown or just do small-talk. Just do never touch even remotely information about yourself.

But, even if you happened to say something about the crime: don’t panic. It still has almost no legal meaning until you sign it. So don’t start agonizing like “Now that I have already told him, I might just as well sign it.” For the prosecutor and even more for the judge, it is first and foremost a signed statement that counts. Of course, once something has slipped out of your mouth, the investigator will be furious to get you repeat it (and sign it). Don’t even say you lied. Just sit this out by getting back to remaining silent.

 Stockholm syndrome. When people are kidnapped and suddenly deprived of their entire normal social environment, they tend to create ersatz relations with the people who surround them. So you, too, might end up “understanding” why and what the police or the prosecutor did to you ( “after all, they are just doing their job”). Don’t! If you are desperate for human relations with scum, become friends with the yakuza detainees in your cell instead. You will find out that they have more dignity than the cops – at least under these special circumstances.

Insist on your rights to contact people

They will strip you of almost any dignity, but you should by all means use your rights to contact people from outside. Insist on your rights – you don’t have to sign forms for that.

 Vienna convention: Foreign prisoners have two exclusive rights that Japanese nationals don’t have. You are entitled to see embassy staff and to have an interpreter around. These rights are fixed in the Vienna convention which has been signed also by Japan. The words Vienna convention (Wiin-joyaku) and “human rights” (jinken) come in very handy throughout your stay. Mention them at liberty whenever you are unhappy with something; especially down in the detention cells. They don’t care about your private complaints, but they are afraid you could eventually report a violation of your rights to embassy people, who in return could complain about your treatment with their superiors (the Ministry of Justice via the Ministry of Foreign Affairs).

 Embassy: Police have to notify your embassy or consulate of your arrest immediately, even if you do not explicitly ask them to. They are contacting them through official channels though: police authority → ministry of Justice → ministry of Foreign Affairs → your embassy. This takes up your first two days – during which they will try especially hard to pressure you into a statement. Tell them you will not say anything before you have seen your embassy people (and after embassy people have come to see you, continue your silence, because you are not bound to your promise)

People from the embassy or the consulate have to come and see you as many times as you ask them to, even if you are imprisoned in a remote police station in Aomori – consular assistance to nationals is one of their core tasks.

The embassy/consulate can do a lot for you – but they cannot get you out of prison. You are not important enough that your government will start an international conflict with Japan. But what they do for you is indeed of help;

– Provide a lawyer. Officially an arrestee is informed of his rights to an attorney on the 4th day in jail – and then you have to remember his telephone number. Embassy staff typically visits you on your 3rd day and will make sure you get a lawyer. asap

– Contact your friends and family. They will explain to them in a familiar language (i.e., not in Japanese) what happened to you. Again, probably the embassy is going to get faster to them than your lawyer so this route is especially useful for contacting the friends that are able to help you out with money necessary to pay the lawyer and the victim.

– Improve your prison condition. The conversation with embassy staff has to be in Japanese or has to be translated into Japanese, and it will be monitored by somebody of the prison staff. This might seem obnoxious in the first place, but it is actually the chance to improve your conditions. Just tell them frankly all the little humiliations police has inflicted on you so far – you can be sure the prison staff guy is listening carefully (Vienna convention!). In my case, I had been refused pen and paper – I mentioned that to my embassy representative in front of the prison staff guy, in Japanese. For the rest of my stay, I basically got my own pen for the whole day.

 Interpreter. The Japanese police have registered interpreters for any language that is an official language in some country of this world. That is because the Vienna convention states that every official conversation has to be translated into (and from) your language by an interpreter. This starts right at the arrest – the arrest warrant has to be read to you in your language.

So, by all means, never waive your right to an interpreter, thinking you handle this on your level of Japanese. And don’t accept an English interpreter, either, if your native tongue is not English. You probably don’t know all those legal terms in your own language – how the hell should you be familiar with them in a foreign language?!

When I asked my interrogator once what he would do if he had to deal with a suspect from Iceland (only 300,000 native speakers), he said he was positive that they would find somebody for that too, somewhere in Japan, even, if the translation had to be conducted by telephone.

The presence of a third person (interpreter) also helps alleviating the aggressive atmosphere between you and your interrogator. And last but not least the lengthy translations take up some of your endless interrogation time.

 Lawyer. Get one as soon as possible.
You have the right to a lawyer and your lawyer is the only person who is allowed to see you as often as he wants to, and, as opposed to the embassy people, without your conversations being monitored by prison staff. He is the only person who the police or prosecutor will accept as your official representative. And most importantly, he is the only person that can really get you out.

Insist loudly on having a lawyer from the minute you are arrested. Here it comes in handy if you remember your lawyer’s phone number – give it to the police or the prison staff and they will probably contact him just to make you shut your mouth.

You shouldn’t talk at all – but this goes especially for the time before you have seen your lawyer for the first time. So, while they are exerting special pressure on you to talk while you have no lawyer yet, tell them during that time that precisely because you have no lawyer, you will not make any statements. That will speed their efforts to get you one.

Just forget what you saw in the movies: In Japan, lawyers do not have the right to assist you or be present during your interrogations. They do not have the right to see the evidence before the prosecutor formally charges you (that’s when it is too late). And you will only be able to talk to them through a Plexiglas window

 Doctor. Even if you have to take some medicine regularly, you are not allowed to take any of your pills with you into jail. The positive side is that they are obliged to take you to a doctor or the hospital as soon as you tell them that you really feel ill. You should consider playing this card as the ultimate resort, for example, when you think that you are going to crack (and talk and sing) during their endless interrogations. Tell them you feel terrible and that you have to see a real doctor. Make up fake health problems. They will take you to a normal hospital because of your Vienna convention rights – afterwards, they have no way of punishing you if the doctor finds you to be in good shape.

 Friends and Partners. On foreign arrestees, the prosecutor will infallibly put a communication ban (sekkin-kinshi), which means that you may not see anybody from outside except for members of the group of people mentioned above.

There is a trick, however, to see your close ones, or at least one of them. He or she has to pose as an interpreter for your lawyer. The conversations with your lawyer are not monitored (as compared to those with embassy people), so they should be able to talk to you relatively freely.

Your friend/partner has to:

– Speak good Japanese (otherwise obvious that he/she doesn’t qualify as interpreter), or, if he/she is Japanese, speak your/a foreign language
– Preferably have some name card that shows that he is qualified to do translations
Of course, the lawyer must be willing to play along, and the police must not know about the prior connection between you and the “interpreter”.

Getting out

There are two main ways to get out unharmed.

 Alibi. You have got or know of convincing proof establishing that you have been far from the crime scene at the time of the crime, and that you can thusly not be connected to the crime. Or you have proof that the witnesses or victims lied. In any case, never tell the interrogators about this proof. They lose their face when you can prove their arrest was wrong from the start . Instead of releasing you, they might be tempted to tamper with their/your evidence.

Instead, tell your lawyer about the proof as soon as possible and make sure that your lawyer can provide the proof to the prosecutor (not to the police) while you are still detained. Even here, the lawyer should hand over only copies to the prosecutor, not originals. You cannot be too paranoid…

 Victims withdraws complaint. Lighter crimes like assault or sexual harassment typically belong to the shinkokuzai type of crimes. This means that police/prosecutor only investigate the crime if the so-called victim of the crime officially files a complaint. On the other hand, it means that they have to stop the investigation – and release you– immediately if the victim withdraws his/her complaint before the prosecutor officially files charges against you.

Thusly, your lawyer has a time window of the 20 days the prosecutor detains you before deciding if he/she is actually going to file charges. In this time window, your lawyer should be able to contact the victim and convince her/him to withdraw. Most lawyers claim to be successful sooner or later in talking the victim into signing the magical withdraw form. Lawyers carry that form with them and will submit it instantly to the prosecutor once signed.

For succeeding with this strategy, your lawyer needs three things:

– Money (“apology money”). The going rate for a complaint withdrawal starts at 200,000 Yen and can reach 500,000 Yen or even a million. You need your friends to provide the lawyer with the money, he will not advance it at his own expense.

– Time. At first, most victims will be stubborn and even avoid contact with your lawyer. On the long run, a skilled lawyer can convince most people that you do not really deserve years in jail, that you have already been punished enough by the weeks in detention that you feel sorry and that money is nice. So the victim should be contacted as soon as possible – the withdrawal form has to be signed before the prosecutor files charges.

– Contact data of the victim. This is the tricky part. Don’t rely on getting it from the police or prosecutor; instead use the bumpy road and hire a private investigator.

Police and prosecutor will not release telephone number or address of the victim to your lawyer unless you show them that you feel sorry for the victim. However – that is the trap – they will not give it to your lawyer the victim afterwards, either. After all, they have gone through all this pain talking the victim into charging you with a crime – why should they help you talking the victim into withdrawing it again? In my case, after my lawyer had approached the police investigators about the contact data, it so turned out that the victim had “conveniently” gone abroad for vacation, by “coincidence”, he wouldn’t come back until the end of my detention period.

So do not write letters or make statements of apology (that prosecutor might use against you if the victim does not withdraw). Instead, your lawyer has to find the victim by himself. Even if you don’t know the victim’s full name, it will be on your arrest report. With the name and some circumstantial information provided by you, a private detective should be able to find out contact data of the victim in a few days.

Fascist Disneyland: Stay, leave, revenge?

Foreigners who get out of prison hell tend to reconsider the very base of their life: Is this country (Japan) still really the place where I want to live after all this wrong has been done to me?

Unfortunately, it appears that police are watching you twice as hard as they did before that, when you were just “one of those foreigners”.

Regardless of what you decide to do, consider this after getting out of jail:
– Write down your story.
– Post it on the net and/or send it to civil right groups. The Japanese justice system is definitely fucked up, and the more people talk about it, the better.
– Legal action. It is close to impossible to sue Japanese police or prosecutors in Japan. It is also difficult to (counter-)sue a Japanese national (for example, accusing the victim of perjury) if you are a foreigner. However, there are three more convenient ways to take revenge in court:
➢ Sue them in your home country. If they have been ignoring some fundamental rights during your detention, there might be a chance police-prosecution-victim are liable of a criminal offense against you in your home country.
➢ Start a class action in Japan: In Japan, more than elsewhere, it is the number of plaintiffs that makes a case. If you discover that a number of people have experienced the same unfair treatment, consider gathering those people and suing the responsible parties together. Again, for this, you should be getting in touch with civil rights groups first.
➢ Sue them in a civil court. The Japanese justice system is much more balanced and advanced on the civil side than it is on the penal side. Check with your lawyer.

Whatever your actions are – inform friends and public about what you are doing.
ENDS

無罪でも延々勾留 スイス人に裁判長「お気の毒」…また無罪

mytest

無罪でも延々勾留 スイス人に裁判長「お気の毒」…また無罪
2008年04月09日22時38分
http://www.asahi.com/national/update/0409/TKY200804090374.html

 覚せい剤取締法違反などの罪に問われ、一審・千葉地裁で無罪判決を受けた後も勾留(こうりゅう)が続いていたスイス人女性(28)の控訴審で、東京高裁は9日、検察側の控訴を棄却する判決を言い渡した。女性の勾留は解かれたが、不法残留のため入国管理施設に収容されたとみられる。

 中山隆夫裁判長は、「知人に頼まれて国外から持ち込もうとしたスーツケースの中に、覚せい剤が入っているとは知らなかった」との女性の主張を受け入れ、有罪とするには合理的な疑いが残ると述べた。言い渡しの後には、無罪でも勾留が続いた経緯に触れ、「裁判所としても気の毒だったと思う。しかし、知らなかったとはいえ、軽率にも覚せい剤を持ち込んだ。犯罪とみられても仕方のない面があったことを理解してほしい」などと、女性に向けて語りかけた。こうした「説諭」は極めて異例。

 女性は06年10月に覚せい剤約2.3キロをマレーシアから密輸しようとしたとして逮捕、起訴された。千葉地裁は昨年8月に無罪を言い渡したが、控訴した検察側が勾留を求め、東京高裁が職権で勾留を続けてきた。

 日本人が被告の場合は通常、一審で無罪判決が出れば刑事訴訟法の規定により釈放される。しかし、不法残留の外国人がいったん国外退去となれば、控訴審を続けられなくなる可能性が高いため、無罪でも勾留の必要があるとされた。

 弁護側は「外国人だけ勾留するのはおかしい」と勾留の取り消しを求めて争ったが、最高裁は昨年12月、「罪を疑う相当な理由があるため控訴審で勾留しても問題はない」と結論づけた。ただし、5人の裁判官のうち2人が、刑事訴訟法の手続きと出入国管理法の手続きに不備があることを批判した。

 女性は入管施設に一時入ったこともあったが、逮捕から1年5カ月余にわたって勾留され続けた。弁護人は「無罪であればなおさら、今までの勾留は何だったのか分かりにくい。日本人だったら勾留されていなかった。女性は法の不備による犠牲者だ」と指摘し、法整備を訴えた。

 東京高検の鈴木和宏次席検事は「誠に残念。判決内容を十分検討し、適切に対処したい」とコメントを出した。仮に上告すれば、再び勾留が問題となる可能性がある。
ENDS

“Hostage Justice”: Swiss woman acquitted of a crime, but detained for eight months anyway during prosecution’s appeal

mytest

HANDBOOKsemifinalcover.jpgwelcomesticker.jpgFranca-color.jpg
Hi Blog. Here’s another oddity of Japanese “justice”. The prosecution is so strong in this country that it can hold people hostage–incarcerate them even if they are judged innocent.

In the extremely rare case (more than 99 percent of all criminal cases that go to trial result in conviction) where the prosecution loses (meaning and the accused is adjudged innocent and goes free), the prosecutors can appeal. Unfortunately, as you can see in the article below, the rights of the accused differ by nationality.

If you are a Non-Japanese, and even if you are judged innocent by a lower court, you are still incarcerated for however many months it takes for the higher court to deliver a verdict (in the case below, innocent again). Because foreigners aren’t allowed bail in Japan. Unlike Japanese: When Japanese defendants appeal guilty verdicts, they are not detained (see Horie Takafumi and Suzuki Muneo; the latter, now convicted of corruption twice over, is still on the streets, even re-elected to the Diet!).

The logic for detaining the Swiss woman in the article below is even more stupefying. The usual argument given for continuing to imprison foreigners is because they are assumed to be a flight risk (the same logic applied to denying foreigners home loans, credit cards and cell phones)–i.e. they might leave the country! (whereas Japanese are chained to these islands, of course). However, in the Swiss woman’s case below, the prosecution argued for her detention because she might overstay her visa and be deported! (I wonder if she was then counted as an “overstayer”…)

Finally, note that the innocent Swiss defendant below still is in custody, despite two innocent verdicts. Expect more months (if not years!) of detention if the prosecution decides to appeal to the Supreme Court! Read on and shake your head in noncomprehension….

Let’s launch a series on the Debito.org Blog on how fucked up Japan’s judiciary is–and start with this case of “hostage justice”. Debito in Sapporo

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Swiss woman acquitted of drug smuggling again; questions raised about her detention
04/10/2008 THE ASAHI SHIMBUN
http://www.asahi.com/english/Herald-asahi/TKY200804100148.html
Courtesy of TPR

A Swiss woman on Wednesday was again found not guilty of drug smuggling, but she had to remain in detention for nearly eight months after being acquitted the first time.

The decision by the Tokyo High Court raises further questions about the practice of incarcerating foreign defendants during the appeals process after they are found innocent.

Lawyers representing the 28-year-old woman said she is a “victim of defects in Japanese laws” and called for new legislation to deal with the problem.

In the ruling, Presiding Judge Takao Nakayama brushed aside prosecutors’ arguments that the Swiss woman intentionally tried to smuggle about 2.3 kilograms of methamphetamines hidden in a suitcase in 2006, saying there was “room for reasonable doubt” about her guilt.

The woman said she was asked to carry the suitcase by an acquaintance and did not know what was inside.

The woman was arrested in October 2006 and later indicted on charges of trying to smuggle methamphetamines from Malaysia.

In August 2007, the Chiba District Court ruled the woman was innocent. But prosecutors appealed, and were granted permission from the district court to detain the woman.

Her detention, including the period spent in an immigration facility, lasted for more than 11/2 years.

After reading the ruling Wednesday, Judge Nakayama told the woman that her detention could not be avoided.

“Even this court cannot help but feel sympathy,” Nakayama said. “But you imprudently brought methamphetamines into Japan even though you said you were not aware.

“Please understand there was ample reason to assume a criminal act,” he said.

Her lawyers said there is a double standard concerning Japanese and foreign defendants.

“If the defendant were Japanese, she would not have been detained,” one lawyer said. “Now that she has been found not guilty, the rationale behind her detention has become even more unclear.”

Under the Criminal Procedure Law, a Japanese defendant found innocent would be immediately released from detention. But it is not the same for foreigners.

Prosecutors have argued that if foreign defendants are deported because their permits to stay in the country have expired, it would be difficult to continue with an appeals trial.

The twice-acquitted woman could end up back in detention if prosecutors decide to appeal once again.

Kazuhiro Suzuki, deputy chief prosecutor of the Tokyo High Prosecutors Office, issued a statement Wednesday, saying the ruling was “very disappointing” and that prosecutors will “study the ruling carefully and take appropriate measures.”

The woman was taken into custody at an immigration facility after Wednesday’s ruling.

The woman’s lawyers sought her release after her first acquittal, but the Supreme Court in December ruled in favor of the prosecutors.

The top court said there was sufficient reason to suspect a crime had occurred and saw no problem in detaining the woman for the appeals trial.

However, two of the five justices on the panel said the detention was the result of flaws in the Criminal Procedure Law and the Immigration Control and Refugee Recognition Law.(IHT/Asahi: April 10,2008)
ENDS

UN News recent articles on Human Rights Council

mytest

Hi Blog. Here are a gaggle of recent UN News articles on the Human Rights Council, the one which monitors countries (like Japan) on their human rights practices. Here’s hoping they’ll be coming down on Japan soon for it’s broken promises regarding establishing a law against racial discrimination. Arudou Debito in Sapporo

==================================

UN HUMAN RIGHTS BODY BEGINS FIRST-EVER EXAMINATION OF ALL COUNTRIES�-? RECORDS
UN NEWS @un.org, New York, Apr 7 2008 5:00PM
The Universal Periodic Review, a new mechanism to examine the human rights record of every United Nations Member State, was launched today at the Human Rights Council in Geneva.

Over the next two weeks, a first group of 16 countries �-? starting with Bahrain and Ecuador �-? will have their records scrutinized, as part of the Review, one of the reforms which differentiate the Council from the Commission on Human Rights, which it succeeded in 2006.

The Review meetings will feature interactive discussions between the States in question and a working group comprises all of the Council�-?s 47 members, according to a UN spokesperson.

The discussions will be based on national reports and information from a variety of sources, including treaty bodies, Special Rapporteurs �-? independent experts on specific topics that report to the Council �-? non-governmental organizations, national human rights institutions and academics.

Algeria, Argentina, Brazil, Czech Republic, Finland, India, Indonesia, Morocco, the Netherlands, the Philippines, Poland, South Africa, Tunisia and the United Kingdom are the other countries being reviewed over the next two weeks.

Under the Review�-?s work plans, 48 countries are scheduled to be reviewed each year, so that the UN�-?s complete membership of 192 countries will be reviewed once every four years.

Last month, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon urged the Council to assure that all countries were scrutinized equally. �-�The Review must reaffirm that just as human rights are universal, so is our collective respect for them and our commitment to them,�-? he said.
2008-04-07 00:00:00.000

==================================

KICKING OFF NEW REVIEW REGIMES, HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL NEARS END OF SESSION
UN NEWS at un.org, New York, Mar 28 2008 6:00PM

Having initiated the first periodic review of the human rights performance of all States and established rapporteurs on groundbreaking new rights topics, the seventh session of the United Nations Human Rights Council finished the bulk of its work today in Geneva.

The session, which was opened by Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on 3 March, did not conclude formally today as expected, but instead decided to continue for one more half-day session to be held next week, to finish hearing statements from delegations and to adopt its report to the General Assembly.

Among the major accomplishments of the session was the inauguration of the first Universal Periodic Review, under which all UN Member States will be examined to assess whether they have fulfilled their human rights obligation, at the rate of 48 a year.

In addition, 11 special rapporteurs were nominated, including an independent expert with a new mandate to cover rights obligations related to access to safe drinking water and sanitation.

Among other achievements, the 47-member Council elected the 18 members of its Advisory Committee, which will hold its first session from 4 to 15 August.

The Committee�-?s experts will function as a think-tank for the Council, which was created in 2006 to replace the Human Rights Commission as part of ongoing UN reform.

At the Council�-?s eighth session, which will take place from 2 to 13 June, the Council will examine the first report of its working group on the Universal Periodic Review, which will start its work on individual countries on 7 April.

Speaking to reporters today, Council President Doru Costea said he was �-�rather optimistic�-? about the start of the Universal Review. However, he cautioned: �-�The proof of the pudding is in eating it.�-?
2008-03-28 00:00:00.000
==================================

UN RIGHTS BODY SAYS STATES MUST REFRAIN FROM PROFILING WHILE COMBATING TERRORISM
UN NEWS @un.org, New York, Mar 27 2008 6:00PM
The United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva today passed a resolution calling on States to not resort to racial, ethnic or religious profiling while countering terrorism.

Adopted without a vote, the text urges States to fully comply with their obligations regarding torture and other forms of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

It also �-�opposes any form of deprivation of liberty that amounts to placing a detained person outside of the protection of the law.�-?

Additionally, the 47-member body adopted five other resolutions.

It extended the mandates by three years of its Independent Experts on the effects of foreign debt and other related international financial obligations of States on the full enjoyment of all human rights; on human rights and solidarity; and on minority issues.

The Council also adopted texts pertaining to the staff composition of the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), as well as on the enhancement of global cooperation in the field of human rights.

The body will wrap up its seventh session, which began on 3 March, tomorrow.
2008-03-27 00:00:00.000
==================================

WORLD HAS COLLECTIVE RESPONSIBILITY TO ELIMINATE RACISM, BAN KI-MOON SAYS
UN NEWS @ un.org, New York, Mar 21 2008 4:00PM

Racism still hurts too many individuals and communities around the world, Secretary-Ban Ki-moon said today, calling on all countries and civil society groups to play their part in the fight to stamp out both racism and racial discrimination.

In a message to mark the International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, which is celebrated today, Mr. Ban said next year’s formal review of actions taken since the 2001 World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance adopted its Declaration and Programme of Action offered an opportunity to make important progress.

“Racial discrimination is a concern to all peoples and countries,” he said. “This review process is an opportunity to engage in an inclusive and transparent manner on an issue that demands our urgent and close attention.

“I call on all countries and civil society to make constructive use of the time between now and the formal review process to work out their differences so that we can seize this opening to boost our collective efforts to stamp out racism. This issue is too important; we cannot fail.”

The Secretary-General noted that the General Assembly proclaimed 21 March as the International Day to honour the memory of the scores of peaceful protesters who were massacred on this day in 1960 in the South African township of Sharpeville as they demonstrated against the racist apartheid-era ‘pass laws.’

“There has been significant progress since then, not least through the dismantling of the apartheid system. But racism continues to plague too many individuals, communities and societies the world over.”
2008-03-21 00:00:00.000
==================================

ALL STATES SHOULD SIGN GLOBAL PACT AGAINST RACIAL DISCRIMINATION �-? UN RIGHTS CHIEF
UN NEWS @ un.org, New York, Mar 18 2008 5:00PM

The United Nations human rights chief issued a call today for all the world�-?s States to both sign on to the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination and to strengthen their law enforcement so that victims of such discrimination can receive greater justice.

So far, 173 out of 192 UN Member States have ratified the convention, which came into force in 1969 and was the first human rights treaty to be adopted by the General Assembly. But many countries that have ratified have also included formal reservations.

Speaking before a high-level panel in Geneva, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour said it was time for all the States that are yet to do so to become party to the convention and for other States to withdraw their reservations and to accept the complaints jurisdiction of the treaty�-?s supervisory committee.

�-�Racism lies at the roots of many conflicts,�-? she said to the panel, convened just ahead of the International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, which is observed on 21 March. �-�It poses risks to international peace and security. Racism is the springboard for extremism and all types of intolerance.�-?

Ms. Arbour noted that the world has made substantial progress in fighting racism since the General Assembly inaugurated the International Day in 1966, six years after the notorious Sharpeville massacre in South Africa.

However, �-�48 years after the Sharpeville shootings, no country can claim to be free of racism�-?s destructive influence.�-?

The High Commissioner also called on all parties to engage constructively in the follow-up process to the 2001 World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, held in Durban, South Africa.

The theme of this year�-?s International Day is the key role that dignity and justice play in combating racial discrimination, and Ms. Arbour said this �-�reminds us that equality under the law and equal protection of the law are central pillars of the fight against racial discrimination.�-?
2008-03-18 00:00:00.000
==================================

BAN KI-MOON PAYS TRIBUTE TO HUMAN RIGHTS CHIEF, FOLLOWING EXIT ANNOUNCEMENT
UN NEWS @ un.org, New York, Mar 7 2008 3:00PM

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon expressed �-�great regret�-? at the decision of United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour to step down at the end of her first four-year term, which she confirmed today in Geneva.

�-�I have been most impressed by her extraordinary courage, energy and integrity in speaking out forcefully on human rights, which is among the UN�-?s most important mandates,�-? Mr. Ban said, following the announcement Ms. Arbour made at the Human Rights Council �-? the UN body inaugurated under her tenure, which ends in June.

Mr. Ban said that she never hesitated to incur the criticism of States or other parties by highlighting the victims of abuses or pointing out the inadequacies of national legal systems, and she consistently represented the highest ideals of the Organization.

�-�Her legacy will be one of a strengthened and more wide-ranging United Nations human rights system, a stronger focus on justice and accountability, reformed protection mechanisms, and a more balanced approach to the full range of civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights,�-? he said.

Ms. Arbour, a Canadian Supreme Court Justice and ex-prosecutor of UN war crimes tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, assumed the post of High Commissioner in 2004, after her predecessor, Sergio Vieira de Mello, was killed in a terrorist attack in Baghdad.

Along with announcing her departure, Ms. Arbour today presented her final annual report to the Council, highlighting the distressing human rights implications of renewed conflict in West Darfur and Sri Lanka.

In regard to the Council itself, she said the report stressed the need to support the participation of the least-developed countries in the first-ever Universal Periodic Review, which will assess the rights situation in all UN Member States.

She promised to share reflections on her tenure as High Commissioner at the Council�-?s next session in June.
2008-03-07 00:00:00.000
=============================================

For more details go to UN News Centre at http://www.un.org/news
ENDS

Mainichi: MOJ delays decision on requiring Zainichi to carry ID, with abolition of old NJ Registry System

mytest

Hi Blog. In case you haven’t heard, the GOJ is abolishing the old Gaijin Card system. In its place, a “Zairyuu Card”, which you must carry around 24-7 (same as before), only with more centralized policing power and more tracking capability. Except if you’re a Zainichi (Special Permanent Resident) “generational foreigner”, it seems, according to the article below.

Good for them. However, this exemption doesn’t apply to the other “Regular Permanent Residents”, who emigrated here, can stay here forever like the Zainichi, and who probably outnumber the Zainichi for the first time in history as of 2007. How about concerns for their “human rights”, then? Never mind. This is a matter of politics, not logic. Read on. Arudou Debito in Sapporo

=====================================
Japan to delay decision on requiring special permanent residents to carry ID
http://mdn.mainichi.jp/national/news/20080310p2a00m0na013000c.html
Mainichi Shinbun March 10, 2008
Courtesy Jeff Korpa

The Justice Ministry will postpone until next fiscal year a decision on whether to require special permanent residents such as Koreans to carry identification cards after the government abolishes the alien registration system, ministry sources said.

Ministry officials have deemed that they need more time to carefully consider the matter as the human rights of permanent foreign residents are involved, according to the sources.

An advisory council to the government on immigration policies will submit its final report to the justice minister by the end of this month, recommending that the alien registration system be abolished and a system similar to the basic resident register system for Japanese nationals be introduced for permanent residents.

However, it will not incorporate in the report whether the ministry should issue identification cards to special permanent residents or if they should be required to carry such ID cards at all times.

Under the Alien Registration Law, permanent foreign residents are required to carry their alien registration cards.

A final decision on the issue may not be made until the government submits a bill on a new resident register system for foreign nationals to a regular Diet session early next year, the sources suggest.

In January, the Justice Ministry and Internal Affairs and Communications Ministry decided to replace the current foreigner registration system based on the Alien Registration Law with a system similar to the basic resident register system for Japanese nationals.

Mainichi Shinbun March 10, 2008
ENDS

Yomiuri: GOJ revising NJ registry and Gaijin Card system: More policing powers, yet no clear NJ “resident” status

mytest

HANDBOOKsemifinalcover.jpgwelcomesticker.jpgFranca-color.jpg

Hi Blog. Comment follows article.

============================
Ministry plans to strengthen visa system / Plan includes 5-year stay extension
The Yomiuri Shimbun Mar. 21, 2008
http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/national/20080321TDY01305.htm
Courtesy of Jeff Korpa

The Justice Ministry intends to extend the current period of stay issued for foreigners from a maximum of three years to up to five years, based on the recommendation of a government panel on immigration control policies, sources said Thursday.

The panel, which has been discussing ways to improve the system for foreign residents, will submit to Justice Minister Kunio Hatoyama within this month the proposals aiming to boost convenience for foreigners living in Japan lawfully as well as strengthening measures against foreigners who overstay their visas, according to the sources.

The ministry will present to an ordinary Diet session in 2009 related bills to revise the Immigration Control and Refugee Recognition Law, the sources said.

The main pillars of the proposals will be:

— Issuing a new “foreign resident’s card” by the Immigration Bureau and abolishing foreign resident’s registration cards issued by ward, city, town and village governments.

— Requiring foreigners to report to the justice minister any changes in their places of work during their stay in Japan and other personal information.

— Requiring organizations that accept foreigners as students or trainees to report how they study or undergo training programs.

The measures are aimed at unifying and tightening government management on the control on foreign residents as well as enhancing the convenience for foreigners living in the nation lawfully, the sources said.

With the enactment of the revised Employment Measures Law in October, companies hiring foreigners are required to report to job-placement offices their names, visa statuses and other personal information.

With the panel’s recommendation the ministry intends to widen this mandatory reporting to other organizations, including universities, the sources said.

The duration of stay for foreign nationals is determined according to visa status. For example, one or three years are allowed as the duration of stay for a foreign national with the visa status of a spouse of a Japanese or of an intracompany transferee. At first, the duration of stay is one year. But if the person has no problems after this first year, it is common for the duration of stay to be extended to three years.

If the duration of stay is extended up to five years as the envisioned system suggests, renewal procedure burdens over the duration of stay would be lessened for long-stay foreign residents with Japanese spouses.

There were about 2.09 million foreign nationals with alien registrations in Japan as of Dec. 31. Of them, those subject to the envisioned system will include permanent residents (about 780,000 people), spouses of Japanese and intracompany transferees.

The envisioned system will exclude about 440,000 special permanent residents such as ethnic Korean residents in Japan. It also will exclude temporary visitors who are allowed to stay a maximum of 90 days, as well as diplomats and officials.

In response to an increase in the number of illegally overstaying foreigners, the panel set up in February last year a special committee to examine a new resident entry system for foreign nationals living in Japan, under which members conduct hearings with officials at the local municipalities, the Japan Business Federation (Nippon Keidanren) and the Japan Federation of Bar Associations.

(Mar. 21, 2008)
ENDS
===================================

COMMENT: Don’t know what to make of this policy revision yet. On one hand, we have the abolition of the old Gaijin Card and Registry system, in place since shortly after WWII to police foreigners, and registry more akin (they say) to to the current Family Registry system we have for Japanese citizens (in case you don’t know, NJ are “invisible residents”, as Japan is the only country I know of that requires citizenship to register people as juumin “residents” (cf. the juuminhyou mondai)). It also will extend the legitimacy of the former “Gaijin Cards” (which all NJ must carry 24-7 or face arrest) from three years to five. That’s the good news.

The bad news is that this measure, despite claims that it will make life “more convenient” for NJ living in Japan, is mainly a further policing measure. Registration will be centralized in the police forces (not the local municipalities any more), the replacement Cards will have more biometric data and tracking capability (RFID, anyone?), and the cards, as labelled, are rhetorically old wine in new bottles. Despite the translation of “foreigner residents’ card” below, the “zairyuu kaado”, as it’s called in the original Japanese, are not “zaijuu” cards (indicating residency with juumin no juu), rather “zairyuu” (ryuugakusei no ryuu), indicating merely a stay here from overseas.

How nice. We still have to get beyond seeing NJ in Japan as “not really residents”, and all our protestations thus far clearly have not sunk yet in with policymakers at the national level. Arudou Debito

“WELCOME NON-JAPANESE CUSTOMERS” stickers for businesses now on sale at Debito.org (Paypal OK)

mytest

HANDBOOKsemifinalcover.jpgFranca-color.jpg
Hi Blog. Happy to announce, along with the sale of HANDBOOK FOR NEWCOMERS, MIGRANTS, AND IMMIGRANTS, another new program on Debito.org to push back the night–and counteract the nationwide spread of JAPANESE ONLY signs on businesses: New signs that say “WE WELCOME NON-JAPANESE CUSTOMERS”:

welcomesticker.jpg
More details on how you can order these stickers through Paypal here:
https://www.debito.org/welcomestickers.html

I’ll have a list of businesses with the stickers up there as orders come in. Please patronize these establishments, and tell the management that you approve of the sticker!

Arudou Debito in Sapporo

(PS: I’ll be on tour from now until April with only sporadic Internet access. Sorry to keep commenters waiting…)

UN’s Mr Ban calls for all nations to face UN Human Rights Council scrutiny

mytest

HANDBOOKsemifinalcover.jpg
Here are some news updates on the UN and the Human Rights Council. Put the magnifying glass on Japan, too. Given its past excuses re racial discrimination (and the fact that it’s only submitted one human rights report since it effected the UNCERD twelve years ago–it should have submitted one every two years, or by now its sixth report), the GOJ has been unbecomingly and grossly negligent. We still have no law against racial discrimination. And nothing really even in the pipeline. That should be known about. By anyone who seriously thinks that Japan should get its wish to become a UN Security Council member. Just say no until the GOJ shapes up. Debito

=========================
From: UNNews@un.org
Subject: BAN KI-MOON CALLS FOR EQUAL SCRUTINY OF ALL COUNTRIES BY UN HUMAN RIGHTS ORGAN
Date: March 5, 2008 12:00:52 AM JST

BAN KI-MOON CALLS FOR EQUAL SCRUTINY OF ALL COUNTRIES BY UN HUMAN RIGHTS ORGAN
New York, Mar 4 2008 10:00AM UN News

Opening the seventh session of the United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva today, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon today called on its members to ensure that all nations are held equally accountable for the protection of rights as the new body begins its first-ever universal review of their performance.

“No country, however powerful, should escape scrutiny of its record, commitments and actions on human rights,” Mr. Ban said, hailing the start of the Universal Periodic Review, under which all UN Member States – at the rate of 48 a year – will be reviewed to assess whether they have fulfilled their human rights obligations.

“The Review must reaffirm that just as human rights are universal, so is our collective respect for them and our commitment to them. It must help prevent the distrust that surrounded the work of the Commission on Human Rights in its final years,” he added, recalling the accusations of bias and politicization that dogged the predecessor body whose work was taken over by the new Council in 2006.

Looking back at progress since the issuance of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which will celebrate its sixtieth anniversary in December, Mr. Ban said that it had become clear that commitments and accountability are crucial factors in the effort to make those rights a reality for all.

That accountability, in turn, depends on the collective scrutiny of international organizations, governments and civil society, he said, calling it “a duty of the highest order for each individual State, and the raison d’être of the Human Rights Council.”

As for the record of the Council itself, Mr. Ban said that the establishment of its mechanisms and procedures had been on the right track over the nearly two years of its existence.

But he posed the question to Council members of whether they were fully meeting the high expectations of the international community, which included the application of human rights values “without favour, without selectivity, without being impacted by any political machinations around the world.”

“If you meet this benchmark,” he said, “you can count on my fullest support and defence in the face of criticisms and attacks, wherever they may come from.”

The Council’s seventh session, including a high-level portion for the views of government representatives, as well as expert panels and presentations by Special Rapporteurs, will run through 28 March.
2008-03-03 00:00:00.000
ENDS

==========================
BAN KI-MOON PAYS TRIBUTE TO HUMAN RIGHTS CHIEF, FOLLOWING EXIT ANNOUNCEMENT
New York, Mar 7 2008 3:00PM UN News

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon expressed “great regret” at the decision of United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights < " http://www.ohchr.org/EN/AboutUs/Pages/HighCommissioner.aspx">Louise Arbour to step down at the end of her first four-year term, which she confirmed today in Geneva.

“I have been most impressed by her extraordinary courage, energy and integrity in speaking out forcefully on human rights, which is among the UN’s most important mandates,” Mr. Ban said, following the announcement Ms. Arbour made at the Human Rights Council – the UN body inaugurated under her tenure, which ends in June.

Mr. Ban said that she never hesitated to incur the criticism of States or other parties by highlighting the victims of abuses or pointing out the inadequacies of national legal systems, and she consistently represented the highest ideals of the Organization.

“Her legacy will be one of a strengthened and more wide-ranging United Nations human rights system, a stronger focus on justice and accountability, reformed protection mechanisms, and a more balanced approach to the full range of civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights,” he said.

Ms. Arbour, a Canadian Supreme Court Justice and ex-prosecutor of UN war crimes tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, assumed the post of High Commissioner in 2004, after her predecessor, Sergio Vieira de Mello, was killed in a terrorist attack in Baghdad.

Along with announcing her departure, Ms. Arbour today presented her final annual report to the Council, highlighting the distressing human rights implications of renewed conflict in West Darfur and Sri Lanka.

In regard to the Council itself, she said the report stressed the need to support the participation of the least-developed countries in the first-ever Universal Periodic Review, which will assess the rights situation in all UN Member States.

She promised to share reflections on her tenure as High Commissioner at the Council’s next session in June.
2008-03-07 00:00:00.000
ENDS
________________

For more details go to UN News Centre at http://www.un.org/news

出版発表:「ニューカマー定住ハンドブック」新発売

mytest

HANDBOOKsemifinalcover.jpg
======== 出版・ブック・ツアー発表 ========

有道 出人です。ご無沙汰しております。しばらく連絡していない理由は単行本を共著したのです。明細(まえがき、書評、ブック・ツアー日程、目次)はこれから発表します。宜しくお願い致します。
HANDBOOKsemifinalcover.jpg

========================================================
タイトル:「ニューカマー定住ハンドブック 日本で働き、暮らし、根付くために」
英語タイトル:Handbook for Newcomers, Migrants, and Immigrants to Japan
ISBN: 978-4-7503-2741-9
著者:樋口 彰 と 有道 出人
言語:日英対訳
ページ数:372ページ
出版社:明石書店(株)http://www.akashi.co.jp
発売日:2008年3月15日
値段:2300円(本体)税込み2415円
ブック・カバーなど、もっと詳しくは:https://www.debito.org/?page_id=582
========================================================

書評:
========================================================
 樋口氏と有道氏によるこの「ハンドブック」は、日本に在住する外国人にとって「第2のパスポート」になるだろう。現代日本における、法律・経済・社会的な「迷路」を歩んでいく人々にとっての「案内図」となっている。この「ハンドブック」は実用的でわかりやすく、「ニューカマー」の生活向上だけではなく、日本の人道社会の発展にも大きく貢献する内容となっている。
ーージョン・リー博士
カリフォルニア大学バークレイ校社会学部教授国際・地域研究所長、「MULTIETHNIC JAPAN」著者
========================================================

まえがき

 労働者の移住はグローバル化する世界では無視できない現実だ。日本も例外ではなく、近年の日本の外国人登録者数、国際結婚数、永住権取得外国人は記録的な数となっている。本書は、日本人でない人たちが日本に定着し、安定した生活を送り、日本社会にも貢献できるようなるためのガイドブックである。

 日本は、世界有数の裕福国であるだけでなく、生活水準も非常に高い。日本に来たいと思う人はたくさんいる。実際に多くの人が日本にやって来ている。一方で日本でも外国人に来てもらいたいと考える人は多い。内閣府のレポート、経済団体、そして国連も日本が高齢化、少子化、納税者層の縮小に対応するには、さらに外国人が必要だと提言している。しかし、残念なことに移住に関する政府の対応は十分とはいえない。ニューカマーたちが、日本に定着し、住民として安定した仕事と生活を送るために必要となる施策・情報提供がまだ十分とはいえない。私たちは、この実用ガイドブックがその一助になれば良いと考えている。

 この実用ガイドブックは、どのような社会に溶け込むためにも必要となるそれぞれのステージに対応した7つの章から構成されており、1)入国の手続、2)雇用の確保・安定、3)起業、4)諸問題への対処、5)将来・定年への備え、6)シビルソサエティーの発展への寄与という流れになっている。多くの読者に読んでもらえるように、簡単な英語(英語を第二言語とする読者のため)とふりがなつきの日本語からなる見開き構成となっている。

 この実用ガイドブックは、全ての情報を網羅的に提供するものではない。むしろ、効率よく必要な情報を捜すことができる簡潔で気軽に買うことができる一冊としてつくられている。他に詳しい情報を載せた「生活マニュアル」やホームページ(役所の電話番号一覧などについて)がある場合には、情報の重複しないように参照先を記載するのみに留めてある。又、この本は日本の法令を遵守する読者向けのものである(そのつもりのない方はおことわり!)。この本が、日本の制度に精通した者からのアドバイスとして、皆さんの時間を節約し、無用のトラブルを避け、日本で生活していく上での選択肢を探す上で、役に立つことを願っている。

 この2007年度版は、実用ガイドブックの初版である。本書でのアドバイスは全て、著者の意見に基づくものであり、最初から全ての点について一番良いアドバイスをできるとは考えていない。将来の改訂にむけて、皆さんからの情報提供を頂き、より皆さんのニーズにあったないように改良を加えていければ幸いである。皆様のご意見・ご感想は大歓迎であり、さらに将来中国語、ポルトガル語、スペイン語、タガログ語、ヒンディー語、ウルドゥー語等の他言語への翻訳を協力して頂ける方がでてくることを期待している。

 皆さんが、この素晴らしい国で豊かな暮らしを送ることを願って。

— 樋口 彰、行政書士
(higuchi DOT akira AT gmail DOT com)
— 有道 出人、JAPANESE ONLY著者 
(www.debito.org, debito@debito.org)

有道 出人のブック・ツアー(3月15日から4月1日まで):
========================================================
3月15日(土) 仙台FRANCA 福祉プラザにて
3月16日(日) 東京新橋 NUGW本部にて
3月17日(月) Roppongi Bar Association, Century Courtにて
3月18日(火) 外国特派員協会(FCCJ) Book Break 有楽町にて
3月19日(水) アムネスティ インタナショナル 高田馬場にて
3月21日(金) 長野 亀清(かめせい)旅館にて
3月22日(土) 長野 亀清(かめせい)旅館にて
3月23日(日) Good Day Books 東京都恵比寿にて
3月25日(火) 大阪FRANCA 大阪市立市民学習センターにて
3月27日(木) 滋賀大学にて
3月28日(金) 日本全国語学学会(JALT) 神戸支部 国際会館にて
3月29日(土) 日本全国語学学会(JALT) 和歌山支部 ビッグアイにて
3月29日(土) 日本全国語学学会(JALT) 大阪支部 生涯教育センターにて
3月30日(日) 日本全国語学学会(JALT) 岡山支部 表町サンカクAビルにて
4月1日(火)  福岡 福岡ゼネラル・ユニオンにて
開催場所へのリンク先は https://www.debito.org/?page_id=582
========================================================

目  次
========================================================
第1章 来日のための手続
1 - 日本のビザ制度を理解する(ビザ、在留資格(SOR)、在留資格認定証明書(COE))の違い   
2 – 日本に来るための手続
  - 在留資格認定証明書を国外から取得する
  - 在留資格を日本国内で取得・変更する
  - ビザ、在留資格、在留資格認定証明書のまとめ
3 – 日本に来てからの手続
  - 家族を呼び寄せる
  - 一時出国する
  - 滞在期間を延長する
  - 転職する
  - 就職のため在留資格を変更する
  - 入国管理局での手続のまとめ
4 –  どんな在留資格があるのか?
  - 全27種類の在留資格の一覧
  - 職種にあわせた在留資格の例
  - 在留資格をとるための条件の例
5 -  オーバーステイや資格外の活動をすると?
 - 最近の入管法の改正
  - 知らずに違反してしまう例
  - オーバーステイした場合のアドバイス
6 – 永住許可と日本国籍
  - 違いと取得のための条件
7 –  まとめと安定した在留資格に向けてのアドバイス

第2章 安定した仕事と生活のために
1 - 日本の労働環境の特徴
2 – 労働に関する法律
3 - 労働契約
4 – 給料の制度
5 – 源泉徴収と税金
6 – 労働者のための労働保険と社会保険
7 - まとめ

第3章 事業を始める
1 – なぜ起業か
2 – 個人事業か法人事業か?
3 – 会社の種類
4 – その他の事業形態(NPO、LLP)
5 – 株式会社を設立して事業を開始する方法
6 – 事業の許可
  7 – 事業を続けていくために必要な定期的な手続
  8 – 事業を成功させるためのアドバイス
  9 – 用語集

第4章 こんなときはどうするか? トラブルへの対処法
警 察:
(オーバーステイ、外国人登録証やその他の入管に関することは第1章を参照)
   警察官からパスポートや身分証明書(「外国人カード」)のチェックを受けたとき
   警察官以外からパスポートや外国人カードのチェックを受けたとき
   警察に逮捕や拘留されたとき
   交通事故にあったとき
   犯罪の被害者になったとき

差 別:
(差別の定義については、 )
   商業施設への入場を断られたとき
   ホテルの利用を断られたとき
   アパートへの入居を断られたとき
   貸主と問題があったとき、退去するよういわれたとき
   ローン利用を拒否されたとき
   差別と感じることについて抗議したいとき

裁 判:
(日本の裁判制度については、 )
   法律的アドバイスが必要なとき、弁護士が必要なとき
   裁判を起こしたいとき
   少額訴訟(詐欺、契約違反等)を起こしたいとき

職場での問題:
(労働に関係する法律、労働条件その他の職場についての内容で、一般的なことは第2章参照)
   労使問題で行政機関からの支援が必要なとき
   労働組合に参加したり、労働組合を設立したいとき
   転職したいとき

家族に関する問題:
(家族について、結婚や子供の入学といった一般的なことは、  章参照)
   日本人の子に、外国人親の氏をつけるには
   子供が学校での問題(イジメ)にあったときは
   子供の学校をかえるには
   家庭内暴力(ドメスティックバイオレンス)にあったら
   離婚したいときは
   子供との面会、親権、監護に関する問題があるときは
   未婚で日本人男性の子を妊娠したら

生活一般:
(日本で生活するうえで障害克服や生活改善についてよくある質問。銀行口座開設などの一般的な内容は  章参照)
   日本語を勉強したいとき
   クレジットカードを取得したいとき
   保険に加入したいとき(自動車保険、生命保険、損害保険)
   運転免許証を取得したいとき
   永住権を取得したいとき
   家やマンションを購入したいとき
   自分で事業を始めたいとき
   カウンセリングや精神的な支援が必要なとき
   日本国籍を取得したいとき
   公職選挙にでたいとき

未来、定年、死に備える:
(年金、長期投資等については、第6章参照)
   遺言の書き方
   相続に関する日本のルール
   母国の文化にあわせた葬式をするには
   母国で葬式をするために遺体を送還するには
   墓地を確保するには

第5章 こんなときはどうするか? トラブルへの対処法
  1-経済的な備え
     -退職金制度
-年金制度
-民間の保険制度
-その他の長期的投資
  2-生活・医療についての備え
     -介護
     -老人保健
-成年後見
  3-遺言・相続について
     -相続と税金
-遺言書

第6章 社会へ還元する: シビルソサエティーの発展
1. 団体を探す
2. 新たに自分で団体を設立する
3. 団体を正式なものにする
4. 行動から主義・主張へ
5. 「日本は決して変わらない」という主張を前向きにとらえる
6. 結論

第7章 まとめとアドバイス
索引
以上

Quick Report on Okinawa Trip: AmerAsian School, Kina Shoukichi

mytest

HANDBOOKsemifinalcover.jpg
Hi Blog. Quick report about my recent trip to Okinawa, February 28-March 1, 2008:
debitonahaairport.JPG
I was invited by a troupe of academics (Dr Lee Setsuko of Seibold University, Nagasaki; Dr Kojima of Osaka Shukutoku University; and Dr Tanaka Hiroshi, of Ryuugoku University, and one of Japan’s foremost academics of NJ activism in Japan) down to Ginowan, Okinawa, to check out the local AmerAsian School.
amerasianschoolsign.JPG

(Ginowan-Shi Shimashi 1-15-22, phone 098-896-1215)
http://www.city.ginowan.okinawa.jp/2556/2552/2553/taiiku/2378.html
Some pertinent links:
http://naha.usconsulate.gov/wwwh-20061128.html
http://www.japanupdate.com/?id=4968
http://www.trackpads.com/forum/marine-corps/5254-marine-volunteers-make-kids-smile.html

The Amerasian School is a very worthwhile organization. amerasianschoolfront.JPG Located in a local city-run center and about to celebrate its tenth anniversary, it provides an education to children who fall through the cracks in Japan’s education system.

An estimated ninety percent of children there are from relationships from the US military bases, mostly single Japanese parents raising their children in Japan, but unable to fit into regular Japanese schools (due to bullying etc. issues). As the USG only allows those who are currently connected to US military to attend its free on-base schools (meaning children born out of wedlock, or left behind after divorce or desertion, are not entitled to on-base education), these are case of families that cannot afford the local Christian international school (with tuition fees of 80,000 yen a month; the AmerAsian School only charges 25,000 yen a month).

The AmerAsian School, which covers American elementary and junior high, lives on tuition, donations, and cheap perpetual lease agreements from Ginowan City. It was created to avoid embarrassment before the 2000 Nago Summit, when local activists offered to bring the subject of left-behind uneducated American-citizen children up with Hillary Clinton. However, as with most “ethnic schools” in Japan, it is in no way funded by the Education Ministry and enjoys no official “student discounts” etc. for transportation, food, etc.

From what your correspondent could see in a two-hour stay, the school is clean, orderly, and systematic. amerasianschoolclassJPG.JPGThe children are spritely, friendly, bilingual (for most of them, their first language is Japanese), with the majority a lovely blend of Japanese and African-American or Hispanic. The teachers, and principal Asano Makoto, are very dedicated folk indeed, and forgo a lot to make sure these children get at least a basic education.

What happens when the kids reach high-school age? Well… some of them there were many questions I would have liked to ask, but I wasn’t there to specifically interview them, so only got a few queries in edgewise. What I know I’ve written down for your information. If you want to know more, two books in Japanese (which alas I have not had time to read yet) you might consider tracking down:
————————-
Teramoto Hirotaka, ed. “Amerajian Suku-ru–Kyousei to Chihei o Okinawa Kara” (Fukinotou Shobou, 2001). ISBN 4-434-0958-3

Uezato Kazumi, “Amerajian–Mou Hitotsu no Okinawa” (Shin Nichi Purosesu KK, 1998). ISBN 4-87699-398-X
————————-
Suggest that anyone who can try to visit and contribute something.

////////////////////////////////////////////////

By the way, we spent two evenings in Kina Shoukichi’s Live House “Chakra” on Kokusai Doori, Naha, taking in his brand of Okinawan music (guitars and jamisen combined masterfully, and incredibly hooky songs). Picture of his troupe in action:
kinachakura.JPG
http://www.champloose.co.jp/

His Wikipedia entry, for what it’s worth:
——————————-
Kina Shokichi (Kina Shōkichi, 喜納昌吉, born June 10, 1948 in Koza (now part of the city of Okinawa), Okinawa, is a Ryukyuan rock musician who, along with his band Champloose, played a large role in the Japanese home-grown “folk rock” scene in the 70s and 80s. His first big hit was “Haisai Ojisan” (Hey, old man) in 1972, which he wrote when he was in high school. (He was actually in prison on drug-related charges when the song became a hit.) He is now perhaps equally well-known for his ongoing activism in the name of peace.
He was elected a member of the House of Councillors in July 2004.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoukichi_Kina

——————————-

He performed on Friday night; forty minutes of masterful jams and danceable sets. Met him afterwards for a small chat and got a signed copy of his CD. He’ll get copies of my books later.

I was less than 48 hours on Okinawa, but saw a hell of a lot. Even took a quick taxi ride up to Kadena Gate Doori (where we were admonished by an automatic-weapon toting Beigun guard not to take pictures by the gate), where we saw the effects of the current “lock down”. debitokadena.JPGThe Japanese press that morning made a big deal about the shuttered shopfronts due to lack of business. It didn’t look all that bad to me, and it looked more prosperous (such as it was) than outside Misawa Air Base sans lock down.

kokusaidoorimarket.JPGdebitokokusaidoori.JPG

Hope to get down to Okinawa again someday soon. Was very impressed by the friendliness of the people and the relative responsiveness of even shopkeeps in the tourist traps. Should linger longer next time to let impressions sink in deeper.
okinawapighead.JPG

Arudou Debito back in Sapporo
ENDS

ABC News (USA) finally breaks the story about Japan as haven for child abductions

mytest

HANDBOOKsemifinalcover.jpg
Hi Blog. Here’s a magnificent article from ABC News (USA) about how Japan remains a haven for child abduction after a Japanese-NJ marriage breaks up.

Long-overdue attention is given one of Japan’s worst-kept secrets–how NJ (who have no Family Registry) have essentially no parental or custody rights in Japan after a marriage breaks up. And how Japan refuses to take any measure to safeguard the access of both parents to or the welfare of the child under the Hague Convention (which it refuses to sign).

I met Paul Wong during my speech last December at the upcoming film documentary on this subject, FOR TAKA AND MANA. Glad he’s gotten the attention his horrible case deserves. I too have no access to my children after my divorce, and I’m a citizen! Bravo ABC. Get the word out.

More on this issue on Debito.org here.
Arudou Debito in Sapporo

//////////////////////////////////////////////
Spirited Away: Japan Won’t Let Abducted Kids Go
American Parents Have Little Hope of Being Reunited With Children Kidnapped to Japan
By RUSSELL GOLDMAN
ABC News (USA) Feb. 26, 2008
http://www.abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/story?id=4342760&page=1
Courtesy of Damian Sanchez

Kaya Wong’s parents never imagined they would be able to have a baby.

Born two years after her mother was diagnosed with cancer, Kaya, now 5 years old, was a miracle.

But for Paul Wong, Kaya’s father, the unimaginable soon became the unthinkable. Months after the cancer fatally spread to his wife’s brain in 2005, Kaya, he says, was kidnapped by her maternal Japanese grandparents.

Despite being his daughter’s sole surviving parent, he has few options available to him as an American in Japan, a historically xenophobic country that does not honor international child custody and kidnapping treaties. It’s also a nation that has virtually no established family law and no tradition of dual custody.

He knows where his daughter lives, where she goes to school and how she spends her days, but despite the odd photograph from a family friend, he has not seen his daughter once in the last six months.

Wong is one of hundreds of so-called “left-behind” parents from around the world whose children have been abducted in Japan, the world’s only developed nation that has not signed the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

‘Heartbroken’

There are currently 39 open cases involving 47 American children spirited away to Japan, a key American ally and trading partner, but many more go unreported. Not a single American child kidnapped to Japan has ever been returned to the United States through legal or diplomatic means, according to the State Department.

“This entire experience has left me heartbroken,” Wong told ABCNEWS.com. “We always wanted children. My wife and I talked about starting a family for a long time, but because Akemi was sick we kept having to wait. When Kaya was born, I promised my wife that we would move to Japan so that our daughter would know about her Japanese heritage and Akemi, despite her own illness, could care for her elderly parents.”

Wong, a 41-year-old lawyer, says he does not regret keeping his promise to his ailing wife, but his pledge set into motion a series of events that have kept him from seeing his only child.

“She’s very energetic, outgoing, active, inquisitive innocent little girl. She is simply perfect, and sweet as can be. She is not afraid of anything,” he said of his daughter during a phone interview from Japan. “I’m breaking up just thinking about her and talking about her. She loves to laugh and has a smile just like her mother’s.”

Kaya was born in San Francisco in 2003 and is a dual citizen of the United States and Japan. The young family lived in Hong Kong, with Akemi making occasional trips to California for treatment until she and Kaya moved in with her parents in Kyoto, Japan.

Abuse Allegations Common

For more than a year after her mother’s death in December 2005, Kaya continued to live with her grandparents, with Wong visiting monthly from Hong Kong as he worked to find a job that would allow him to move to Japan.

Once he found a job and was preparing to move, however, things suddenly changed.

“Once I moved to Tokyo last year, the grandparents did everything possible to keep Kaya away from me. When I said I’m taking her back, they filed a lawsuit against me filled with lies and claimed I had sexually assaulted my daughter. There are no facts and the evidence is completely flimsy.”

According to Wong, with the exception of one long weekend in September 2007 when he took his daughter to Tokyo Disney, her grandparents were present every time he was with Kaya.

He said that a Japanese court investigator found that the girl was washed and inspected every day after a swimming lesson at her nursery school and her teachers never noticed signs of abuse.

ABCNEWS.com was unable to contact the grandparents Satoru and Sumiko Yokoyama, both in their 70s. State Department officials would not comment on the specifics of this case, but a spokesperson said that allegations of abuse were not uncommon in some abduction cases.

Kaya’s grandparents are elderly pensioners. Under a Japanese program to stimulate the birth rate, families with young children receive a monthly stipend from the government, one reason Wong believes the grandparents have chosen to keep Kaya.

Though Wong’s case is unique in that most child custody disputes result from divorce not death, his is typical of the legal morass in which many left-behind parents find themselves. He has spent thousands of dollars on legal fees and makes regular appearances for court hearings, but his case, like many others, remains stalled.

American parents quickly learn that the Japanese court system is rather different from that of the United States.

There is no discovery phase, pretrial disclosure of evidence, or cross-examination. Lawyers for each side simply present their cases before a judge.

Furthermore, there is no concept of parental abduction or joint custody. The parent or family member who has physical custody of the children, generally the Japanese mother or her family, is granted legal custody.

“Fundamentally, people believe that Japan must have a legal system available to deal with child custody and similar problems,” said Jeremy Morely, an international family lawyer. “In reality, however, there is no such system.”

“Family law is very weak in Japan. There is also a cultural perception that a Japanese child is best off in Japan with a Japanese parent. Boiled down, the law is: Whoever has possession has possession and the other parent should mind his own business,” Morely said.

Culture Clash

Culturally, there is no concept of dual custody or visitation. Once a couple gets divorced, the children are typically assigned to one parent and never again have contact with the other parent.

After divorcing his then-pregnant wife of four years in 1982, former Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi retained custody of his two eldest sons, Kotaro and Shinjiro. His ex-wife Kayoko Miyamoto took custody of their unborn son, Yoshinaga Miyamoto. Since the divorce Miyamoto has not seen her two eldest sons, and Koizumi has never met his youngest son, Yoshinaga.

Against this cultural backdrop, American parents seeking custody find themselves in an endlessly revolving door of hearings that go on for years and yield no results.

Paul Toland, a commander in the U.S. Navy, estimates he has spent “well over $100,000 in attorney’s fees” for the last five years in an effort to get back his daughter.

Toland’s daughter was taken by his ex-wife to live with her parents in Tokyo while he was stationed in the country in 2003 and he has not seen the girl since.

He began fighting for custody of his daughter Erika, 5, when she was just 9 months old. When his wife, Etsuko Futagi, committed suicide in September 2007, Erika’s maternal grandmother got custody.

“I feel real frustrated because I’m in a holding pattern,” said Toland, 40, who lives in Virginia. “It has been a nightmare trying to get through this.”

Possession Is Key

Though Toland is his daughter’s sole surviving parent, judges in countless hearings have upheld the cultural imperative that it is in the child’s best interest to stay with whomever she is with at that moment.

“Whoever has custody when they walk into court has custody,” Toland said. “Judges never want to disrupt the status quo. There is no enforcement of the law because there is no teeth in the system. Police won’t intervene because they say it is a family matter. Every judge knows that and rules in favor of the status quo because he would lose face if he ordered something that would never be followed through on.”

For now, Toland can only wait and keep trying through the courts.

He said he regularly sends “care packages  big boxes full of presents and videotapes of me reading her children’s books.” Since he does not know whether those videos ever make it to his daughter, he keeps copies locked in a strong box to give her if and when he finally gets custody.

He has considered kidnapping Erika, but says the girl is under her grandmother’s constant supervision.

“Parental abduction is not a crime in Japan, but taking a child out of Japan is a crime. It is legal to abduct my own kid in Japan, but it’s a crime to take her back home with me.”

His parents have each just turned 80 and have never met their granddaughter.

“It is a crime to keep my parents from knowing and loving Erika,” he said.

‘Countries Disagree’

With the legal and cultural cards stacked against them, many Americans turn to the State Department and politicians for diplomatic help, but to little avail.

“On most things Japan is an important partner,” said Michele Bond, the State Department’s deputy assistant secretary for Overseas Citizens Services. “This, however, is one issue where we greatly differ. Left-behind parents often engage in a fruitless campaign to get back their children.”

The State Department, she said, regularly raises the issue of international abduction and Japan’s refusal to join the Hague Convention, a 1980 international treaty on cross-border abductions.

Other countries, particularly Muslim nations that practice Shariah, also have not joined the treaty, but in many of those cases the United States has worked out agreements, or memoranda of understanding, to allow for the return of children. There is no such memorandum with Japan.

“We engage with the government of Japan at every opportunity and bring it up all the time. We try to raise the visibility of the issue and make them aware that this is not the tradition in other countries. Progress has been slow but we are hopeful to find a solution that respects both cultures and everyone’s rights, especially the children,” Bond said.

The State Department currently has 1,197 open cases of child abduction involving 1,743 children worldwide.

Bond said many cases of abduction to Japan go unreported because families know there is little the U.S. government can do to help.

Legislative Efforts

“Culturally, the Japanese are not disposed to deal with foreign fathers. The law does not recognize parental child abduction. Criminal extradition is limited because they don’t recognize that a crime has taken place,” she said.

Despite efforts on behalf of U.S. legislators to contact Japanese diplomatic officials, Wong has received no word of a change in his case.

In April 2007, Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., sent a letter to President Bush about child abduction on the occasion of the Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s visit to the United States.

“I am very concerned over Japan’s lack of assistance in these cases and urge you to insist that Japan cooperate fully with the United States and other countries on international parental child abductions. Furthermore, I hope you will press Prime Minister Abe to support the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction and to implement a formal two-parent signature requirement for obtaining passports for minors,” the letter stated.

The Japanese government would not comment on specific cases of child abduction and in an exclusive statement to ABCNEWS.com never used the word “abduction.”

“We sympathize with the plight of parents and children who are faced with issues of this kind, which are increasing in number as international exchange between people expands,” reads a statement from the Japanese Embassy in Washington, D.C.

The embassy said that the Hague Convention was inconsistent with Japanese law, but that joining the convention was still under review.

“Regarding the possibility of Japan’s joining the Hague Convention, we must point out that [the] Japanese legal system related to child custody is quite different from the underlying concept of the Hague Convention. Japanese courts always take into consideration what the best interest of a child is with respect to each individual case, while the Convention provides the relevant judicial or administration authorities in principle [to] order the return of the child, unless the limited exceptions apply.”

Few Successes

Left-behind parents are used to hearing similar language from Japanese judges and American diplomats relaying messages from their Japanese counterparts.

“We strongly believe that it is in the best interest of a child to have access to both parents,” said the State Department’s Bond.

She said a child has never been returned to the United States as a result of diplomatic negotiation or legal wrangling, and knew of only three cases where children were reunited with their American parents  “two in which the parents reconciled and one in which a 15-year-old ran away.”

Michael C. Gulbraa of Salt Lake City is the father of that 15-year-old, his now 17-year-old son Christopher. Christopher returned to the United States in 2006, and calling him a runaway undermines years of careful planning by his father to ensure that if his son wanted to get out of Japan he would be able to.

After Gulbraa and his wife divorced in April 1996, she gained custody of Christopher and his older brother Michael K. Gulbraa.

In 1999, when the boys were 8 and 9 years old, Gulbraa learned that his wife’s second husband was under investigation for abusing his biological son.

After months of investigation by court-appointed guardians and experts, his ex-wife, Etsuko Tanizaki Allred, feared she would lose custody and took the boys to Japan in 2001.

In 2002, the court gave Gulbraa custody and charged Allred under Utah law with felony custodial interference and a federal international kidnapping statute. Despite the international warrants for Allred, Japanese courts did not require her to return their children to Gulbraa.

“That’s how things remained until July 2006. I did everything I could think of. I even petitioned the Vatican to intervene,” he said.

In 2006, Christopher contacted him via text message and said he wanted to come back to the United States. Since his sons were kidnapped, Gulbraa had been working on a plan to get the boys emergency passports and onto a plane with whatever help U.S. diplomatic officials could legally provide.

One Who Escaped

When the boy’s mother learned of the plan, she took his cash and identification, making the train trip to the consulate and obtaining a passport all the more difficult.

Gulbraa will not disclose quite how his son got the money for the train, but said he had traveled to the Osaka consulate and provided it with photos of the boy and questions only he could answer in order to confirm his identity.

“Chris said he was going for a bike ride and got on a train from Nagoya to Osaka. We had to work through his not having any money or picture I.D. In late August 2006, he got home with the help of every agency of the U.S. government involved. From the consulate in Osaka to the embassy in Tokyo, everyone did everything to get him home without breaking the law.”

For Gulbraa being reunited with his son is bittersweet knowing his older son, Michael, remains in Japan.

Today, Gulbraa supports other left-behind parents and continues to petition the U.S. government to ensure kidnapped American children are reunited with their rightful guardians.

“It is mind boggling that we kowtow to an ally because we are worried about trade and beef exports, when people’s children are being torn from them. Abduction is abduction and it needs to stop.”
ENDS

Aly Rustom compares treatment of NJ as crime suspect with crime victim

mytest

HANDBOOKsemifinalcover.jpg
ESSAY FROM ALY RUSTOM.  THOUGHTS ARE HIS ALONE.  POSTED HERE TO STIMULATE DISCUSSION. THINK FOR YOURSELVES ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT YOU AGREE.  ARUDOU DEBITO

Recently, we all heard about the alleged rape of an Okinawan junior high school girl that took place a few weeks ago. Of course, we all did. It was on the front page and made the headline news. Japanese people were shocked and appalled at the incident. The US military apologized and promised to take steps to deter further incidents in the future. The girl is now safe at home with her family.

However, even before all that happened, there was a more harrowing but unknown crime. This time the criminals were Japanese and the victim was an American. On December 29th, 26 year old David James Floyd, an American tourist, was hit by a taxi in Sendagaya, Shibuya ward around 12:30 at night. The taxi sped off, didn’t bother to call an ambulance, phone the police, take Floyd to the hospital, or even get out of the car to see if he was ok. He just hit him and ran.

As Floyd was lying on the ground, he was run over by another car only about 5 minutes later. This time, a 19 year old man was driving. Floyd was killed and this man too fled the scene. Both men were arrested, but get this: “due to lack of evidence” the taxi driver was released.

Now honestly, if we compare the above with the Idubor case a terrifying truth comes to light: not only are foreigners framed for various crimes and sentenced without evidence and faulty testimony the Japanese government and its police force protect Japanese who murder foreigners. How is it possible that the Japanese government found Mr. Idubor guilty and the taxi driver innocent? The taxi driver is guilty of at least 2 crimes: hit and run, reckless endangerment, and a few more. The 19 year old is guilty of involuntary manslaughter at least. However, the taxi driver is free and I’ll bet you the 19 year old will get a slap on the wrist- if that.

This isn’t the first time we’ve seen this happen when a foreigner is murdered. Lucy Blackman’s killer was acquitted of her murder, and Lindsay Ann Hawker’s killer escaped from the police… or did he? Did they just turn the other way while he escaped?

The most basic right- the right not to be murdered- and the most basic justice- punishing a killer, is denied to foreigners in Japan. The American military took some steps to try and avoid such instances in the future and the head of the armed forces in Japan bowed and apologized.

For the murder of 3 young foreigners in Japan, cut down in their prime for absolutely no good reason, what have we got? We can’t even get justice for these people. Not even a conviction, let alone an apology. Is this a civilized government?

I have traveled around the world, have lived in dictatorships, monarchies, and under tyrannical governments, but even under those regimes, if you murdered someone you would be prosecuted under the law, no matter where you came from. I have never seen a country that condones the murder of foreigners by its own citizens. What really makes me sick to my stomach is that now Japan is trying for a seat in the UN Security Council. Is this really a country that is ready for a veto vote and is ready to make decisions that will affect the entire world? I hope not.
ENDS

Interesting forthcoming book: “Another Japan is Possible”, citing Tony Laszlo of long-defunct “Issho Kikaku”

mytest

HANDBOOKsemifinalcover.jpg
Hi Blog. Speaking of books…

We have another book on Japan’s internationalization coming out. Press release below. It looks to be a serious and interesting study of the forces of minority voices in Japan. Well done Professor Chan.

There is one thing I found odd. Chapter 42 below reads:

42. Issho Kikaku
Tony Laszlo
Ethnic Diversity, Foreigners’ Rights, Discrimination in Family Registration

Hang on. Tony Laszlo of “Issho Kikaku”? Issho Kikaku has been a moribund organization for more than two years now (its archives taken offline for “site renewal” December 4, 2005! Here’s today’s screen capture:).
isshosite021808.jpg

By taking the work of hundreds of activists offline like this, Laszlo in fact has a history of deleting the historical record of Japan’s internationalization. Likewise, the Shakai Mailing List Archives, which he was also involved in, also mysteriously disappeared about a year ago. Substantiation for all these assertions here.

How can a “non-active” activist representing a non-existent organization pop up like this in a serious academic work? Well, Jennifer by sheer coincidence contacted me a couple of weeks ago for some introductions into Japan’s Muslim Community. When queried about this situation, she said she conducted the interviews with Laszlo about two years ago. Probably before Laszlo deep-sixed his site. So she probably didn’t know about his impending conversion to cartoon character and cute keitai mascot (beats sullying his hands in real activism, anyway, or tainting his cutie-pie salability with any connection to controversial topics). I wish Jennifer had done a follow-up check before publication, though. Perpetuates an incorrect job description for other serious researchers.

Anyway, without any sarcasm, I think this looks to be a great book. Bonne chance. I’ll be getting a copy. Arudou Debito in Sapporo

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////

NEW BOOK RELEASE:
Another Japan is Possible: New Social Movements and Global Citizenship Education
Edited by Jennifer Chan, Stanford University Press 2008.
ISBN: 0804757828
Price: USD 27.95

Book summary:
This edited volume, a sequel to my first book – Gender and Human Rights Politics in Japan – looks at the emergence of internationally linked Japanese advocacy nongovernmental networks that have grown since the 1990s in the context of three conjunctural forces of neoliberalism, militarism, and nationalism. It connects three disparate literatures on the global justice movement, Japanese civil society, and global citizenship education. Through the narratives of 50 activists in eight overlapping issue areas—global governance, labor, food sovereignty, peace, HIV/AIDS, gender, minority and human rights, and youth—this book examines the genesis of these new social movements; their critiques of neoliberalism, militarism, and nationalism; their local, regional, and global connections; relationships with the Japanese government; and their role in constructing a new identity of Japanese as global citizens. Its purpose is to highlight the interactions between the global and local—that is, how international human rights and global governance issues resonate within Japan and how in turn local alternatives are articulated by Japanese advocacy groups—and to analyze citizenship from a postnational and postmodern perspective.

Advanced Praise
***
“A surprise for observers who view Japan as a developmental state, run by a powerful central bureaucracy and aligned with a conservative party whose policies often override public interest, this book casts new light on a vital aspect of Japan’s emerging political economy. A remarkable group of scholars, professionals, and citizen activists reveal the growing numbers of committed Japanese participating energetically in local and global organizations.”
˜Daniel I. Okimoto, Stanford University

“Jennifer Chan vividly illustrates the recent flourishing of nongovernmental organizations in Japan. With good contextualizing narratives and rich, informative examples of the thinking and sentiments nongovernmental organizations generate, she delivers a must-read in the study of globalization and localization.”
˜Inoguchi Takashi, University of Tokyo

“This book is rich in primary material on the human side of NGO activity in Japan, along a wide spectrum of organizations. This is a nuanced view of advocacy, strategies, and institutions, sometimes against the grain of existing views, and it adds the perspectives of new global citizens of Japan, engaged in knowledge production.
˜Merry White, Boston University

Table of Contents:

Introduction: Global Governance and Japanese Advocacy Nongovernmental Networks
I. Global Governance
1. AM-Net/Advocacy and Monitoring Network on Sustainable Development
Kawakami Toyoyuki Global Governance Monitoring and Japan
2. Japan Center for a Sustainable Environment and Society
Sakuma Tomoko Education, Empowerment and Alternatives to Neoliberalism
3. Peoples’ Plan Study Group
Ogura Toshimaru Building a People-based Peace and Democracy Movement in Asia
4. Association for the Tobin Tax for the Aid of Citizens, Kyoto
Komori Masataka Tobin Tax, Kyoto Social Forum and Pluralism
5. Pacific Asia Resource Center
Fukawa Yoko Education for Civil Society Capacity Building
6. Japan International Volunteer Center
Takahashi Kiyotaka Community Development, Peace and Global Citizenship

II. Labor
7. Japan Trade Union Confederation (Rengo)
Kumagai Ken’ichi Globalization and Labor Restructuring
8. Shinjuku Homeless Support Center
Kasai Kazuaki Corporate Restructuring and Homelessness
9. Equality Action 21
Sakai Kazuko Gender, Part-time Labor and Indirect Discrimination
10. Filipino Migrants Center Nagoya
Ishihara Virgie Migration, Trafficking and Free Trade Agreements
11. Labor Net
Yasuda Yukihiro Neoliberalism and Labor Organizing
12. All-Japan Water Supply Workers’ Union
Mizukoshi Takashi Water, Global Commons and Peace

III. Food Sovereignty
13. No to WTO – Voice from the Grassroots in Japan
Ohno Kazuoki Agricultural Liberalization, World Trade Organization and Peace
14. Food Action 21
Yamaura Yasuaki Multifunctionality of Agriculture over Free Trade
15. No! GMO Campaign
Amagasa Keisuke Citizens’ Movement against Genetically Modified Foods
16. Watch Out for WTO! Japan
Imamura Kazuhiko Self-sufficiency, Safety and Food Liberalization

IV. Peace
17. Grassroots Movement to Remove US Bases from Okinawa and the World
Hirayama Motoh “We Want Blue Sky in Peaceful Okinawa”
18. World Peace Now
Hanawa Machiko, Tsukushi Takehiko and Cazman World Peace Now
19. No to Constitutional Revision! Citizens’ Network
Takada Ken Article 9 and the Peace Movement
20. Japan Teachers’ Union
Nishihara Nobuaki Fundamental Law of Education, Peace and the Marketization of Education
21. International Criminal Bar
Higashizawa Yasushi Japan and International War Crimes
22. Japan Campaign to Ban Landmines
Kitagawa Yasuhiro Landmine Ban and Peace Education
23. Peace Depot
Nakamura Keiko Nuclear Disarmament, Advocacy and Peace Education
24. Asia-Pacific Peace Forum
Ôtsuka Teruyo Building a Citizens’ Peace Movement in Japan and Asia

V. HIV/AIDS
25. Japan AIDS and Society Association
Tarui Masayoshi HIV/AIDS from a Human Rights Perspective
26. Place Tokyo
Hyôdô Chika HIV/AIDS, Gender and Backlash
27. Africa Japan Forum
Inaba Masaki Migrant Workers and HIV/AIDS

VI. Gender
28. Japan NGO Network for CEDAW
Watanabe Miho International Lobbying and Japanese Women’s Networks
29. Japan Network Against Trafficking in Persons
Hara Yuriko Gender, Human Rights and Trafficking in Persons
30. Soshiren/Starting from a Female Body
Ohashi Yukako Gender, Reproductive Rights and Technology
31. Regumi Studio Tokyo
Wakabayashi Naeko As a Lesbian Feminist in Japan
32. Sex Workers and Sexual Health
Kaname Yukiko Sex Workers’ Movement in Japan
33. Women’s Active Museum of War and Peace
Watanabe Mina Women’s Active Museum on War and Peace
34. Feminist Art Action Brigade
Shimada Yoshiko Art, Feminism and Activism

VII. Minority and Human Rights
35. Japan Civil Liberties Union Subcommittee for the Rights of Foreigners
Fujimoto Mie A Proposal for the Law on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination
36. The International Movement Against All Forms of Discrimination and Racism (IMADR)
Morihara Hideki Antidiscrimination, Grassroots Empowerment and Horizontal Networking
37. Buraku Liberation League
Mori Maya Multiple Identities and Buraku Liberation
38. Citizens’ Diplomatic Centre for the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (Shimin Gaikô Centre)
Uemura Hideaki Indigenous Peoples’ Rights and Multicultural Coexistence
39. Association of Rera
Sakai Mina On the Recognition of the Indigenous Peoples’ Rights of the Ainu
40. Association of Indigenous Peoples in the Ryûkyûs
Taira Satoko “I would like to be able to speak Uchinâguchi when I grow up!”
41. Mirine
Hwangbo Kangja Art Activism and Korean Minority Rights
42. Issho Kikaku
Tony Laszlo Ethnic Diversity, Foreigners’ Rights, Discrimination in Family Registration
43. Japan National Assembly of Disabled Peoples’ International
Hirukawa Ryôko Disability and Gender
44. Japan Association for Refugees
Ishikawa Eri The UN Convention on Refugee and Asylum Protection in Japan
45. Center for Prisoners’ Rights Japan
Akiyama Emi Torture, Penal Reform and Prisoners’ Rights
46. Forum 90
Takada Akiko Death Penalty and Human Rights

VIII. Youth Groups
47. Peace Boat
Yoshioka Tatsuya Experience, Action and the Floating Peace Village
48. A Seed Japan
Mitsumoto Yuko Ecology, Youth Action and International Advocacy
49. BeGood Cafe
Shikita Kiyoshi Organic Food, Education and Peace
50. Body and Soul
Takahashi Kenkichi “Another Work is Possible”: Slow Life, Ecology and Peace

Conclusion: Social Movements and Global Citizenship Education
Appendixes
Notes

Target audience:
Japanese studies, Asian studies, feminist studies, human rights and globalization researchers, transnational and local social movement studies.

To order:
Chicago Distribution Center
11030 South Langley Ave.
Chicago, IL 60628
Tel. 1-800-621-2736
Fax: 1-800-621-8471
E-mail: custserv@press.uchicago.edu
or through
www.amazon.com

For more information, please contact:
Jennifer Chan, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor,
Department of Educational Studies, Faculty of Education; and
Faculty Associate, the Centre for Japanese Research, the Centre for Women’s and Gender Studies; and Institute for European Studies.
University of British Columbia
2125 Main Mall,
Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, Canada
Tel: (604) 822-5353
Fax: (604) 822-4244
Jennifer.chan@ubc.ca
http://www.edst.educ.ubc.ca/faculty/chan.html
ENDS

Moharekar Case: Parents raise questions about baby’s death to Sapporo’s Tenshi Hospital

mytest

(revised February 14, 2008 at the Moharekar’s request)

Hi Blog. Here’s a sad tale about the death of a baby while in the womb, and the unsatisfactory explanation, as far as the parents are concerned, given by a Sapporo medical care facility named Tenshi Hospital about what happened.

Dr. Shubhangi MOHAREKAR and her husband Sanjay, Indian citizens who have been doctorate researchers at Hokkaido University for 9.5 years and 6 years respectively, were expecting to have their second child in Sapporo’s Tenshi Hospital (Sapporo-shi Higashi-ku Kita 12 Higashi 3 1-1, phone 011-711-0101).

Up until 11th July 2007, their attendant doctor at Tenshi Hospital, a Dr, Oh-ishi, did not find any abnormality in the fetus. However, just 5 days later, i.e. on 17th July 2007, another doctor, Dr. Watari found abnormalities–the baby had congenital heart disease. On August 1, 2007, their child died in the womb. It was stillborn, despite repeated reassurances of fetal health from Dr Oh-ishi.

I’ll let the Moharekars tell their own story in scans below, but they say the basis of their dissatisfaction is: 1) insufficient diagnosis and prenatal care by the Gynecology Department of Tenshi Hospital of their child’s condition from the start, 2) a sudden, unexplained change in the diagnosis of the fetus when the mother detected a change in its life signs, and 3) the ill-treatment from Tenshi Hospital they say they suffered after the stillbirth. Not only did they feel they were rebuffed by the head of the gynecology department of hospital, a Dr Yoshida (who hitherto spoke good English, but allegedly got upset at them and demanded they speak Japanese properly), they were told the hospital would not accept complaints–-and even charged them 210 yen after the death just to get an explanatory meeting with hospital director, a Dr Tsujisaki!

For the record, the Moharekars are not after money or damages (they would of course prefer their 210 yen got refunded). They just want a full and proper explanation in writing from Tenshi for this apparent misdiagnosis. Not rebuffs and rudeness. They have never been able to meet Dr Oh-ishi again (she has apparently been transferred to another hospital).

The Moharekars consider Gynecology Department of Tenshi Hospital to be negligent and irresponsible. They want to make sure that what they consider to be mental harassment will not happen to anyone else. The Moharekars are also aware that baby having congenital heart disease is not the hospital’s fault and impossible to change the situation anyhow, but this kind of problem could have been detected earlier using 3D/4D sonography. Early detection could have prepared the family for the emotional strain, expense, and logistical problems of surgery on the newborn.

I have met them, and they said they may be contacted at their email address, included in page one of their letter below.

Evidence follows. Arudou Debito in Sapporo

LETTER OF COMPLAINT TO TENSHI HOSPITAL, DATED OCTOBER 24 2007. PAGE ONE OF TWO.
moharekar001.jpg
PAGE TWO OF TWO.
moharekar002.jpg
THE LETTER IS SIGNED AT THE BOTTOM BY TENSHI HOSPITAL DIRECTOR, DR TSUJISAKI, CERTIFIED AS WITNESSED.

HOSPITAL CHARTS INDICATING ALL LIFE SIGNS WERE NORMAL FOR SEVERAL MONTHS UNDER DR. OH-ISHI. NO HEART DEFECT DETECTED.
moharekar003.jpg

DOCUMENT FROM TENSHI HOSPITAL WITH DIAGNOSIS OF HEART DEFECT, ACCORDING TO A DIFFERENT DOCTOR, DR WATARI.
moharekar004.jpg

LETTER FROM ATTENDANT HOSPITAL IN INDIA WITH RESULTS OF PHYSICAL EXAMINATION, SHORTLY BEFORE FETUS’S DEATH. HEART DEFECT DETECTED.
moharekar005.jpg

EXPLANATION FROM DR TSUJISAKI, PAGE ONE OF TWO.
moharekar006.jpg
PAGE TWO OF TWO.
moharekar007.jpg

BILL FROM THE HOSPITAL OF 210 YEN FOR A POSTMORTEM EXPLANATION FROM HOSPITAL DIRECTOR DR TSUJISAKI:
moharekar008.jpg
ENDS

Italian TV SKY TG24 on Sapporo Yuki Matsuri… and racial discrimination in Japan

mytest

Hello Blog. Here’s a pleasant surprise… Pio d’Emilia of Italian channel SKY TG24 interviewed me last week regarding the Otaru Onsens Lawsuit, racial discrimination, and life in Japan as a naturalized Japanese citizen, with the 59th Sapporo Snow Festival as a backdrop. Broadcast nationwide in Italy on February 9, 2008.

Although the entire 8 1/2 (no connection to Fellini) minute broadcast is, naturally, entirely in Italian (I felt like Clint Eastwood in reverse, dubbed back under Sergio Leone’s direction), you can still get the flavor of the matsuri and an inkling of one perspective in Japan. They even got an associate of the Mayor of Sapporo, a Mr Nakata (whom I’ve known in Sapporo since 1987!), to say for the record that the issue of racial discrimination is a thing of the past and solved! Not likely.

It’s a fat file, but download it from
https://www.debito.org/hokkaido_invio.mov

Enjoy! Transcript follows, translated by Emanuele Granatello. Arudou Debito in Sapporo

///////////////////////////////////////////////////

It took 3000 m3 of snow, 385 trucks and more than 3000 people to realize this huge snow sculpture dedicated to ancient Egypt`s splendours.

This year Yuki Matsuri, the “Snow Festival”, has been dedicated to culture and friendship with the African Continent, and this is the statue launching the festival.

We are in Sapporo, capital city of Hokkaido island, the northernmost Japanese region. In the past this place had been inhabited by Ainu, a people of caucasian origin, now almost extinct because of various vicissitudes and, above all, because of a still existing discrimination problem.

The Snow Festival involves all the city of Sapporo, from Odori Central Park, where the gigantic snow structures are realized, to Susukino mall, where the competition for the best ice sculpture is held, and Satorando, located at city doors, where sport and entertainment events are held.

This year, 59th edition, the greatest attractions are the White Labyrinth, and this free, open to everybody breathtaking kamikaze-style rubber dinghy slide.

The Festival was born in 1950, from the idea of some Sapporo boys who, accused by teachers and parents to not know how to use their time, began to make big snowmen throughout the city, the festival grew year by year until it became an international event that in 2008 will attract more than 2 million people, as many as Sapporo`s inhabitants.

The City of Sapporo is modern and organized to the point that, because of the huge amount of snow covering her for 6 months a year, Municipality and Citizens have made a quite original agreement: Municipality will keep roads clean, while citizens will plough the sidewalk. However this is not a binding agreement, nor fines are provided for, so the result is that every now and so sidewalks are ice covered, thus causing many accidents and forcing people to walk very carefully.

Obviously, the main characters of the Event are children. Not only Sapporo and Hokkaido`s schools come to the Festival, but also of many other schools scattered across the archipelago. Moreover, many families use one of the many extended holidays they get in this period, to go to see, maybe for the first time, snow. This kid, committed in her first reportage, comes from Shikoku island, more 1000 km from here.

It`s her first time on the snow.

“For what TV are you working for?”

“For my mom, we were coming together, but suddenly she had some problems at work.” “So?”

“So I came with granny, she`s got a camera, and we decided to do a nice reportage, so mom won`t miss a thing”.

In July in Hokkaido will be held the G8 summit, dedicated this time to global warming.

This is the huge statue that Sapporo`s boys, helped by army, have built for the summit. The Earth is hugged by children surrounded by animals and architectural symbols of participating nations. Tower of Pisa has been chosen for Italy.

The 8 heads of state will meet on the shores of Toya Lake, one hour by car from Sapporo, and if on a side there are big expectations for the advertisement the island will receive from the event, there are also many worries, says Hiroyuki Nakata, Sapporo`s vice-mayor.

Arudou Debito, 42, from California, [20] years ago after marrying a Japanese woman and settling in Sapporo, obtained Japanese citizenship. He teaches Information Science at Sapporo University

Since then he has been fighting a long and difficult battle against a society suspicious and sometimes cruel towards diversity, be it real or perceived.

“Arudou, could you tell us briefly the story that made you somehow famous?

“It`s quite simple. On a 1999 day I went with my family to onsen, Japanese-style spa. But the manager turned me away. < > he said.

The funny part is that even after showing him my Japanese passport he refused letting me enter. < > he told me. I did a very long lawsuit to be in the right, but he didn`t give up. Instead of letting me in after the verdict, he preferred to close the shop. [NB: This is inaccurate. This refers to another sento in Wakkanai. I think there might have been an edit here.]

About this incident Arudou also wrote a book, and he is always trying to change the mind of a people that has just begun to deal with the idea of multi ethnicity and with the fact that there could be white and black Japanese citizens as well.

While I was interviewing him, a group of kids approached us. Their teacher sent them hunting for foreigners signs.

“We are from Sapporo`s Elementary School, can we have your signature?”

“What do you need it for?”

“We have been told to gather foreigners`s signs”.

“Oh really? Do you know that I am not a foreigner? Yes, I am white, but I am a Japanese like you.”

“Can you sign anyway”?

Government officially denies the presence of ethnic minorities in Japan, but what`s the real situation? “So who I am? I also represent an ethnic minority. A white-skinned Japanese man. Japan must put up with multi ethnicity idea. They must put up with the fact there are now one million of naturalized foreigners and hundred of thousands people living here legally, with the right to not being inflicted any kind of discrimination. They are not guests, but citizens.

“For example when they search for a house?”

“Exactly, there are a lot of land agencies specifying they won`t accept pets or foreigners. Would you believe it? We are being considered like animals. In some cases discrimination is more specific. No Chinese, but no problem if you are American or European. Sure, in every country you have that kind of discrimination, but it happen offstage. Here everything is done in broad daylight, there is not any law that forbidding and sanctioning that kind of behaviour.”

“A binding question: why are you doing it? Why did you become a Japanese citizen defying the Empire and its laws?”

“Lots of people ask me that. It`s because I love this country. It is beautiful, amazing places, fantastic food. It`s just because I decided to live here that I want to contribute to make life easier”.

“Rolan Barthes” in his unsurpassed essay about Japan `Empire of Signs`, defined this country a labyrinth, but sure he didn`t mean to make any reference to foreigners, but to the Japanese people. According to the Japanese man Arudou Debito, what`s the recipe to decipher this labyrinth?”

“Trial and error. You take a road and find a wall, take another one and crash against another wall, until you learn to recognize walls and realize that they are not impossible to pass after all. It`s my recipe for life.”

ENDS

Asahi Watashi no Shiten: Schools for NJ children deserve GOJ support

mytest

Hi Blog. An excellent roundup of what’s been covered on Debito.org for quite some time–the emerging underclass of NJ children without an education guaranteed them in Japan. Here are the problems in nutshell. Debito

===============================

POINT OF VIEW/ Nobuyuki Sato: Schools for foreign children deserve support

01/28/2008 The Asahi Shinbun

http://www.asahi.com/english/Herald-asahi/TKY200801280049.html

Courtesy of Steve Silver

More than 2.08 million foreigners now live in Japan. With the rise in international marriages between Japanese and non-Japanese, the number of children who have dual nationality is also increasing. Of them, tens of thousands attend schools for foreigners.

Currently, there are about 100 schools for North and South Korean and Chinese children. In recent years, a growing number of people from South America and elsewhere have settled in Japan.

Schools to accommodate children of such “newcomers” are also increasing. There are 94 Brazilian schools and also schools for children from Peru, India, the Philippines and other countries. The total number of schools for newcomers exceeds 100.

Chinese schools in Japan have a history of more than 100 years, while ethnic Koreans from North and South Korea established schools for their children after World War II to teach them the language and cultures of their motherland. Thus, schools for foreigners in Japan have various backgrounds.

Schools for newcomers are concentrated in the Tokai and northern Kanto regions, home to many Brazilians and Peruvians who work as dispatch employees at automakers and other factories.

A Brazilian school in Ibaraki Prefecture celebrated its 10th anniversary last year. It started out as an unauthorized day-care center for children whose parents work at factories from early morning until late at night. As the children grew, the center set up elementary and junior high school classes.

The government does not recognize schools for foreigners as regular schools that provide general education. Therefore, they do not receive any government subsidies. Most of the schools are supported by donations from fellow countrymen.

While donations to European and American schools are now tax-exempt, the same rule does not apply to North and South Korean and Chinese schools, which are also categorized as kakushu gakko (miscellaneous schools).

Since most schools of newcomers are not even recognized as kakushu gakko but are treated as “private juku,” they are not even eligible for subsidies from local governments.

Some local governments have eased authorization standards for kakushu gakko. But in Gunma, Saitama and other prefectures that apply strict standards for authorization, it is difficult for most schools for newcomers to meet the requirements. Many of them rent small factories that went out of business and split them into six to nine classrooms to give lessons. Such schools do not even have gymnasiums or schoolyards.

Japanese children are guaranteed free compulsory education at public elementary and junior high schools. Accredited private schools also receive generous government subsidies. However, when parents of foreign nationality enroll their children at foreign schools because they want them to learn the languages and cultures of their homelands, they are not eligible for public support measures.

Moreover, at schools not authorized as kakushu gakko, consumption tax is imposed on tuition. Since students are not eligible for a student commuter pass, parents are required to bear a heavier financial burden than their counterparts at Japanese schools.

Although there are more than 200 foreign schools in Japan, few public subsidies apply to them. Most of the schools rely on the self-help efforts of foreign communities alone and are excluded from the realm of public education.

I believe there are few countries in the world like Japan where foreign schools are at a disadvantage compared with regular schools.

As Japan is about to become a “multinational, multiracial and multicultural” society, it is time we break away from “national education” and switch to “multiracial and multicultural symbiotic education.”

For that, we must establish guidelines for education that embrace multiracial and multicultural values and immediately implement systematic support, such as legislation to promote measures for schools for foreigners.

Doing so also meets Japan’s obligation under the international conventions on human rights including the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child.

It is also the duty of adults for children of the 21st century.

* * *

The author heads the research-action institute for Koreans in Japan. (IHT/Asahi: January 28,2008)

ENDS

Kandai PR Harassment: Why you don’t let non-Immigration people make Immigration decisions…

mytest

Hi Blog. As regular readers know, as of October 1, 2007, all employers must report their NJ employees to the MHLW’s unemployment office, Hello Work, or face fines for potentially employing NJ in violation of their visas.

We’ve already uncovered on Debito.org some enforcement difficulties in deciding whether this meant NJ employed “full-time” or “part time” (this, as usual from a GOJ that likes grey areas of enforcement, has been left vague), with one case of somebody being demanded his Gaijin Card for receiving 500 yen compensation! Ludicrous.

Now here’s the next phase. An angry email from a friend of a friend, edited somewhat but with preserved emphases. About a person being hassled by his workplace (Kansai University) regarding issues they clearly know nothing about: over a Re-Entry Permit (being told he’s illegal visawise unless he gets one; wrong) despite being a Permanent Resident. Blogged with permission.

This is why you don’t let people who know nothing of Immigration law make Immigration decisions. Expect more of this sort of thing in future. Arudou Debito in Sapporo

//////////////////////////////////////////

PREAMBLE FROM FORWARDING FRIEND:

I got this mail from a colleague the other day. I am sending it (mostly uncut) to the PALE list to show how schools, which are not immigration officials, can mess up and abuse their power in potentially harmful ways.

Some background:
Apparently the govt. has asked employers to make sure all of their employees have valid papers to work in Japan. Some colleges, such as Kansai University, has therefore been asking non Japanese teaching personnel to prove their status. Others have ignored this, or gone about it another way. Signed, RR.

PS The letter did no good, and KanDai is still hasseling the instructor in question. His gaijin card, which they initially told him had expired (it did not, it is good until late 2008) stated that he was on a spouse visa, and since he was recently divorced, KanDai’s interpretation was that he was no long legally in the country. The problem is that the cards are good for 10 years, and that the card holder had subsequently moved to permanent resident status, a change that was not reflected in the actual card.

FORWARDED EMAIL FOLLOWS:

————————–
Maybe you can clarify this issue for me. Please read the letter below that I sent to Kandai.

While I have not renewed my Reentry Permit yet (which expired in October; from what I understand from many foreign teachers who have Permanent Resident status here, the only problem with having this expire and not renewed is that I cannot get back into Japan–if I leave), I planned to renew it after my classes ended. I have been too busy to go to the Marutamachi office during the semester.

I went to the ward office with a Japanese friend after Kandai told me that I was here illegally. The ward office staff there told me (after seeing my passport and Gaijin Card) that there was no problem with me being here illegally–that I am a PR and therefore legal–and that there is no PR visa that expires.

Kandai still insists that there is a problem. I will go to Marutamachi office later this week–when my friend has time to go. I do not want to go alone, because, if there is a problem, I would be arrested and probably thrown in jail. I want someone to know that I have been arrested, so that they can contact a lawyer or the union.

====================================

Dear Ueno-sama,

Enclosed are copies of the relevant stamps in my passport. Please pass them—and this letter—on to the appropriate person.

I am a PERMANENT RESIDENT in Japan. Please be clear on this point. I have talked with NUMEROUS people (ward office staff and foreign permanent residents teachers of long standing here) about the problem that your office has with my “Gaijin Card”–and they all say that your office is reading the card wrong and that your office apparently does not understand the laws and regulations concerning foreign resident status.

On Christmas Day (a religious holiday for me), I went down to my ward office—and they told me that there was NOTHING ILLEGALLY WRONG with my status here and that they see NO PROBLEM.

Now, I must go down to the Immigration Office (and waste one more day of my time to sort this problem out because after the new year began, your office, again, insisted that there was a problem.

I am sure that there is NOTHING ILLEGAL about my documents—the pertinent one has not expired. From what I understand, the PR visa does not even have to be renewed.

Nevertheless, because your office keeps INSISTING THAT I AM HERE ILLEGALLY, I MUST WASTE ANOTHER DAY IN ORDER TO STRAIGHTEN OUT THIS MATTER. I WILL ASK THE IMMIGRATION OFFICE TO CALL YOUR OFFICE—OR TO WRITE YOUR OFFICE A LETTER–TO INFORM YOU AS TO HOW PERMANENT RESIDENCY STATUS HERE WORKS.

Your office has asked to see my card a few times now and you have made numerous copies. You have asked to see my passport, which, legally, there is no reason your office needs to see this.

I HOPE THAT THESE COPIES FINALLY SOLVE THE PROBLEM.

I only say all of this because your office has caused me much stress over this matter (having an expired visa is cause for arrest, imprisonment–and deportation here—quite harsh punishments—and quite racist, as a matter of fact). So, your office has caused me much worry and wasted time on this matter.

It really makes me wonder if I have been singled out for harassment because I am a union member at Kandai. I will forward a copy of this to my union president, just so my union is aware of this issue. (Ueno-sama, I realize that you are only doing what you are told—but the people in the office should make it a point to understand the law.)
Sincerely,< < __._,_.___ ENDS

Japan Times: Foreigner registration revision to include ID chip, probably same policing function

mytest

Hi Blog. Jun Hongo got on this–the system comes more into focus. NHK said Jan 27 that Gaijin Cards will be replaced with IC Cards, too… Debito

==============================

Foreigner registration system to be revised
May lead to better services, more control
The Japan Times: Saturday, Jan. 26, 2008
By JUN HONGO, Staff writer
http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20080126a1.html

The government plans to abolish the current registration system for foreigners living in Japan and introduce a new regime similar to that for Japanese residents that will manage them on a household basis, Justice Minister Kunio Hatoyama said Friday.

The new arrangement, which is being examined by a team at the Justice Ministry and the internal affairs ministry, is expected to introduce a new registry system under which detailed information of foreign residents on a household basis, instead of an individual basis, will be kept by local governments.

Critics view the new system, however, as increased state control.

Under the current general registration law it is a requirement for foreign residents’ births, deaths and marriages to be reported. But the new alien registration law will make it easier for local governments to collect such information from foreigners.

Local officials often claim it is difficult for them to provide foreign nationals with information in areas such as school enrollment, health insurance and residence tax procedures. Some are also concerned about crimes committed by foreign nationals.

While the new system may help local authorities improve their services for foreign residents, some critics say it is likely to increase governmental control over foreign residents in Japan.

Hatoyama said Friday he hopes to submit a bill to abolish the current Alien Registration Law to enable the new arrangement to be passed in the next ordinary Diet session. The plan surfaced as a result of the government’s decision last June to revise the foreign registration system by 2009 to better cope with local government needs.

“Details have not been finalized and we are not at the point of revealing” the new regulations, a spokesman for the Immigration Control Office said, but the finalized outline of the law is expected to be released this spring.

Under the Alien Registration Law enacted in 1952, all foreigners in Japan are obliged to apply for registration with the local government of their residence.

Currently, only photographs, passport and registration forms are required for the process, which are used to clarify matters pertaining to their residence and status. There were 2.08 million registered foreigners in Japan at the end of 2006.

The government is also considering replacing the current alien registration cards, which foreign residents are required to carry at all times, with a new certificate card.

Under the new system, long-term foreign residents will get registration cards at airports and local immigration offices, which will then be used to register their information at local governments.

The data will be controlled in a similar manner as for Japanese citizens, and used to compile information for taxation, health insurance programs and census-taking. Special permanent residents, including those in Japan before the war and their descendants, are also expected to be listed in the new registry system.

Makoto Miyaguchi, an official of Minokamo, Gifu Prefecture, which has a large Brazilian population, said the current law is not sufficient to provide administrative services for foreigners in his city.

“Since the current system does not gather detailed information, we have often been unable to give adequate services for foreigners in the area,” including school guidance for parents and information on welfare services, he said.

Approximately 10 percent, or 50,000 residents, in Minokamo are registered foreigners.

Miyaguchi said that both his city and its foreign population will benefit from the overall detailed management, since it will be able to better track locations and the status of foreign individuals and households.

But while some suggest that the new system will view foreigners as legitimate residents instead of objects of supervision, others say it will only strengthen government control over foreigners while providing minimal improvement in their lives.

Yoji Shimada, a Tochigi Prefecture-based public notary, said that although a change in the defective Alien Registration Law is welcome, the proposal so far shows no extensive improvement.

“Foreigners will still be listed on a separate ledger from Japanese residents, and they will most likely be required to carry their IDs at all times,” said Shimada, who is married to a Thai.

Shimada said that information on households may become more accessible by local governments, but discriminatory clauses will likely remain. “The Justice Ministry will have better control and more information on foreigners in Japan — and that seems to be the only change in the proposal for the new law,” he said.

The Japan Times: Saturday, Jan. 26, 2008
ENDS

TIME: “Japan thwarts abusive police” by tweaking interrogation rules

mytest

Hi Blog. Too little too late…? And not enough background on Japanese police abuses… Debito

///////////////////////////////////////////
Japan Thwarts Abusive Police
TIME Magazine Friday, Jan. 25, 2008 By AP/MARI YAMAGUCHI
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1706870,00.html
Courtesy of Jon Lenvik

(TOKYO)—No beatings. No threats. No overnight interrogations. Facing mounting accusations of brutality, Japan’s National Police set their first-ever guidelines for questioning methods Thursday in an attempt to rein in agents who go too far in pressuring suspects to confess.

The new rules are the first serious step by the police to change their methods, which have long been criticized at home and abroad for relying too much on confessions — often coerced — rather than on evidence.

The role of confessions has been a cornerstone of a criminal justice system in which more than 99 percent of cases that go to trial result in convictions, and judges are much more lenient in sentencing defendants who have confessed.

The rules, outlined in a 10-page report, ban interrogators from touching, threatening or verbally abusing suspects or forcing them to stay in one position. Interrogation sessions that run overnight or last more than eight hours are prohibited.

Critics, however, say the new rules don’t go far enough because they don’t call for video cameras or defense attorneys in interrogation rooms, though one-way mirrors will be installed.

“The new guidelines are not totally meaningless, and they could bring a certain level of vigilance,” said Toshio Tanaka, a lawyer specializing in interrogations. “But they’re far from sufficient until interrogations can be visually monitored.”

The changes follow a series of high-profile cases that uncovered heavy-handed police tactics.

Police in November admitted that a man had served two years in prison after being convicted of rape in 2002 based on a false confession. The real rapist was captured last year by police, and the first suspect is suing the government.
ENDS

Komeito leader agrees with DPJ proposal to give NJ Permanent Residents the right to vote

mytest

Hi Blog. Do I hear the sound of a wedge being driven into the ruling LDP/Komeito coalition? Debito in Tokyo

/////////////////////////////////////////////////
Komeito leader welcomes Ozawa’s proposal to give foreigners voting rights
http://mdn.mainichi.jp/national/news/20080124p2a00m0na011000c.html
Courtesy of Stephen Vowles

Kazuo Kitagawa, secretary-general of ruling coalition partner Komeito, has voiced support for opposition Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) leader Ichiro Ozawa’s suggestion of considering submitting a bill to give foreigners with permanent residence status the right to vote in local elections.

“I would like a bill to be compiled and submitted,” Kitagawa said of the proposed move, adding that there had been arguments against it within the DPJ. “If they compiled it I would welcome that,” he said.

In a news conference on Tuesday, Ozawa said, “I’ve stressed before that the right for foreigners to vote in local elections should be granted. I’ve been criticized by long-time supporters, but the bottom line doesn’t change.”

There has been a strong tendency within the ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) to take a cautious approach over granting foreigners with permanent residence status the right to vote in local elections. In 2005 Komeito submitted its own bill to the Diet, and the bill remains under deliberation.

Some LDP members have expressed concern over Ozawa’s comments, calling them a move to break up the ruling coalition.
/////////////////////////////////////////////////
ENDS

毎日:外国人選挙権:小沢代表の付与提案に公明歓迎

mytest

外国人選挙権:小沢代表の付与提案に公明歓迎
毎日新聞 2008年1月23日 18時02分
http://mainichi.jp/select/seiji/news/20080124k0000m010019000c.html

 公明党の北側一雄幹事長は23日の記者会見で、民主党の小沢一郎代表が永住外国人に地方選挙権を付与する法案の提出を検討する考えを示したことについて「ぜひまとめて、提出してもらいたい。民主党には反対論もあった。まとめていただくなら歓迎だ」と述べた。

 小沢氏は22日の会見で「以前から(地方選挙権を)認めるべきだと主張してきた。旧来の支持者からしかられたこともあったが、結論は変わらない」と語った。

 永住外国人の地方選挙権付与について、自民党内では慎重論が根強い。公明党は05年に単独で付与法案を国会提出、法案は継続審議となっており、自民党内には小沢発言を「与党分断策」と警戒する向きもある。【西田進一郎】
ENDS

FCCJ Photo Journalist Per Bodner’s account of his arrest on fictitious “assault charges”

mytest

Per Bodner, a professional photo journalist from Sweden (8 years resident in Japan, married with a house here), had a nasty experience in a Tokyo taxicab right outside the Foreign Correspondents’ Club of Japan on his way home from work November 28.

He was arrested because the taxi driver had a spaz attack about him allegedly smoking in the cab (even though Per doesn’t smoke, and wonders if his irritability was a side effect of prolonged use of anti-sleep medicine–not unusual in Japan’s drivers). When Per got out and tried to take another taxi, the cab driver called the cops, claimed Per assaulted him, and had him arrested. There was no evidence of any beating, but Per was taken to a holding cell for interrogation in Tsukiji.

The point is this: Like the Idubor Case, where a Nigerian was sentenced last December to three years for rape despite no physical evidence and flawed accuser testimony, it is becoming increasingly clear that in the Japanese judiciary, the accused’s testimony is discounted (even ignored, or in Per’s view, fabricated) in order to get a conviction. And it especially seems to be the case when the accused is a foreigner, even one as mild-mannered and upstanding as Per is (I’ve met him).

If this can happen to him, this can happen to you–where a nutbar or a person with a “thing” about foreigners can claim you committed a crime, sic the police on you, and have you interrogated for weeks until you crack and sign some sort of confession.

Even when lawyers (which Per managed to contact despite the best efforts of his prosecutors) sprung him in an unheard-of three days (in my view, due to his status as a member of the international press corps), the Prosecutor overruled the judge! See below.

Let’s turn the keyboard over to Per and let him tell the story in his own words. What follows is the text of the statement he made at an FCCJ Press Conference on December 12, 2007, 2-3:30PM, with Panel Discussion on Police Interrogations and “Daiyo Kangoku”, featuring his lawyer, Kazuko Ito; Shinichiro Koike, Secretary General of the Japanese Federation of Bar Association’s Penal Reform Committee and Toru Matsuoka, a DPJ Lower House supporting a bill aimed at revising the Criminal Procedure Code to oblige police and prosecutors to videotape all interrogation of suspects in criminal investigations.

Arudou Debito at the FCCJ, Yurakucho, Tokyo

//////////////////////////////////////////

PS: Per can be contacted for more information via the FCCJ.

=====================================

THE GINZA / TSUKIJI INCIDENT 071128… By Per Bodner

Welcome my name is Per Bodner I am a Swedish photojournalist and regular member of the FCCJ. I will briefly tell you about what happened to me after taking a taxi, and having a verbal quarrel with the driver. I ended up arrested, thus having a chance of peaking into the Japanese police and “justice” system. I have prepared some handouts for all of you: rather than going into details, I will try to cut my presentation to the essential, leaving more space to the question time.

But – first of all – I will recommend everyone here who does not already have an Olympic medal – For your own sake – Go and get one as soon as possible!
I will later explain to you why.

1. Background:

Around eight thirty on the evening of Wednesday 28 of November on my way home after visiting the FCCJ I had trouble, after entering a taxi, with the driver who very aggressively and repeatedly started shouting “NO SMOKING – NO SMOKING”.

As I don’t smoke I got surprised over his shouting the same thing over and over again – NO SMOKING, NO SMOKING. I replied several times to him “OK, OK, FINE NO SMOKING and showed him my empty hands. But he was clearly upset and I decided to get out and to get another cab.

When he finally opened my door, I tried to get another taxi. But they refused. In the meantime, the first driver had called the police. He claims that I have been beating him with my fist once and also kicking him on the leg once. He also claims he has a witness, although I saw none and, until today, I am still unaware of his/her name.

Now let me state very clearly than I am not guilty of any beating or kicking. I have not been beating anyone during my whole life and have no criminal record what so ever – anywhere in the world.

But I do admit (and did so during the questioning) that having become angry I did shout rough words back to him in English in a loud and clear voice.

Police then asked me to follow them to the police station. I did not object to this and went with them without protesting.

————————————-

2. Treatment at the Tsukiji police station.

After arriving at the Tsukiji police station I was questioned for what it felt like – an endless time, at least 5 hours, without any legal assistance. They allowed me only one phone call, to my Embassy. But since it was late night, I just got somebody who promised to inform the competent officer later in the morning. The police took my fingerprints from each and every of my fingers, palm and the “heal of the hand”.

I got an interpreter and very slowly and with sarcastic smiles from the staff standing around while I answered their questions they interrogated me. Police officers walked in and out of the room during the interrogation witch was very disturbing and annoying.

At around 2:00 AM, they told me that I was going to be held in detention.

This came as a shock to me and I got very upset and I could no longer behave politely or constructive.

At one time I managed to pick up my mobile phone and quickly call my wife to inform her about that I was arrested and where I was – but an officer jumped at me to take away the phone. I managed to push him away and could finish my quick call.

I felt totally humiliated and lost in the middle of all these nasty, arrogant and aggressive policemen.

I was then taken to another room where they took away my belongings except for my pullover, socks and underwear. I was then handed a pair of sports long pants.

My own had a string in them so they were also taken.

At the table of this room were four or five A4 sheets of paper containing rules and “rights” in detention. I had no chance to even start to study these papers before they told me to take off my belongings and no further reading of the rules and “rights” was allowed after this. Then I was shown into a cell where another four inmates were asleep. Time was now around 3:30- 4:00AM I guess.

————————————-

3. Environment at the Tsukiji police station detention

I think I can recall 8 detention cells at this floor in this police station where I now was. Each cell containing 5 or more inmates. The area of each sell is approximately

8 x 2,3 m including a toilet box with a glass window facing the sell and the guards seated at a desk outside of the cells – day and night. There are no furnishes in the sells only a worn down wall-to-wall carpet on which the inmates lay their Futon at night.

Food is given 3 times a day through a hole in the cell wall and taken in sitting on the cell floor with the food on an oil-cloth on the floor. The menu, which I listed in the hand outs, was neither appealing nor abundant, but I guess this won’t be much different in any other country.

Breakfast: Japanese type. Lukewarm, very thin powder soup. Cold rice in a Bento box with a red little tiny sour-plum in the middle symbolizing the Japanese flag. Cold artificial fish or meat with some sad over boiled vegetables. Lukewarm or cold water. (Teeth brushing before breakfast)!!!

Lunch: 2 dry and tasteless breads with butter and jam. Cold or lukewarm water.
Dinner: Cold Bento with cold rice, lukewarm or cold water.

Sleeping: 9:00PM – 6:30AM with lights on. Inmates fetch their Futon from a bedclothes room and bring it to the cell.

Washing and tooth brushing: in cold water morning and before bed (only face and neck).

Shower: only every 5th day!!!

At 09AM inmates can shave with shavers and smokers can smoke 2 cigarettes once a day.

Books in Japanese except for 2 cheap detective-story books in English.

(We used the books as pillows during the long day).

————————————-

07 -11-30 Going to the Prosecutor’s office

After breakfast I and some other inmates were asked out of our cells to be searched and then handcuffed and bonded to a blue rope. This was particularly humiliating.

Off we went in a chain-gang, like dangerous criminals, down the stairs and out into a waiting police-bus that would take us to Tokyo Public Prosecutor Office to meet with the prosecutor. After an hour or so we arrived there. We were searched once again and lead on the chain-gang into a huge room with 14 (I think I can recall) cells on one of the long walls. Each cell with capacity for 12 inmates to sit on hard, cold wooden benches (90° seat and back). The numbers 1-12 on the walls. Behind a tiny, low swinging door in the cell there is a toilet and a water tap all to bee seen by the inmates and the guards. No one is aloud to speak or move from one’s place. Here we waited for many hours before meeting with the prosecutor in a special room for a very short questioning. Back to the very cold cell on B-2 I had the chance to meet with my lawyer and my colleague Pio, who was not admitted as such, but as interpreter. At the end of the day into the huge hall and searched again then your number (Ju NaNa) (seventeen) called out in a horrible screaming militaristic voice and back in to the chain-gang again.

Transport with the same procedures as before and back to Tsukiji police station.

Arriving late and dinner was waiting for us. The other inmates had already had their dinner. Back into the cell and a bad sleep on the futon with blankets. Now it was too hot to sleep.

————————————-

07-12-01 Tokyo District Court

The following morning we had to make a long (2 hours +) tour to pick up inmates from other police stations around Tokyo. Then we were able to meet – twice – with a judge, the first time for an interview, second time for getting to know if you were to be released from detention or not. Among all inmates that was interrogated that day I was lucky to be one out of two who was to be released that day. I heard from my lawyer that normally no one is released after the first 3 days in detention but rather most have to stay the whole 23 days or even more in detention. I was happy and relieved, in fact the judge, through the interpret, told me that I had to go back to Tsukiji with the chain-gang transport but after arriving there I would get my belongings and then walk out free.

But the nightmare went on. After returning to Tsukiji police station I got the shocking message that the prosecutor had appealed the judges decision and most likely I had to stay for a longer time in detention. This message made me feel very bad and I was close to start crying.

To my surprise – about 6 hours later – I was called out from the cell and told that I could go home. The judge had stood tall and rejected the prosecutors’ request. I was told that this does not happen often here, if it happens at all!

My lawyer Ito-san and Pio were there to meet me. I had to sign a document saying that I had received all my belongings and happy from being released I signed. Later I found out that a handkerchief that I had blown my nose in once – was missing. The question came to my mind: – Do they take my DNA from my handkerchief?

When we got down to the reception of the police station – there was my wife, our former FCCJ president Dennis and four Swedish nice people that I did not know from before (Pio had picked them up and asked them to join the celebration of my release).

They had brought a bottle of champagne witch we haply finished outside the Tsukiji police station.

Interrogation continues on a “voluntary” basis…

Early last week I was asked by the police to come to Tsukiji police station to undergo further questioning. They said that 2 hours would be enough and my lawyer informed me about the right not to sign any document and to leave the police station at any time of my own choice. I was asked to appear on Friday the 7th of Dec. at 2PM and did so. I had my lawyer and a friend from FCCJ with me. “Just in case”. I just wanted to feel safe. None of these two persons was allowed to be present during the questioning. The police provided an interpreter, Japanese/English, who bore a police batch and told me he was a policeman.

The female police who put the questions to me (her colleges called her detective) was one of the polices that had been coming and going in and out of the room during my first interrogation at the night of the taxi incident.

The questioning lasted, not 2, but 3,5 hours. At that point I told them that I’ve had enough and was tired. When the interpreter told me what the detective had been righting down from my answers I could understand that every, for me positive answer, had not been mentioned.

For example to the question about my background I had answered that I come from and still, most of the time, move in a rather intellectual environments, with good literature and music and where we solve our controversies by talking, not by fist- fighting, and that I never in my whole life have been beating anyone with my fist nor kicking and had newer belonged to any criminal or violent gang. None of these answers was ever written down in their interview with me. Nor that I was brought up by my mothers’ second husband who was, by that time, the chief prosecutor of my hometown.

One of the questions was if I ever had received any awards or medals. I asked that I did not really understand the question. To clarify they asked – If I had received any Olympic medals or governmental awards. My answer to this was that I did not find the question relevant to the investigation.

A few days ago I received a letter from the Tokyo District Court, with the decision rejecting the public prosecutor appeal to extend my detention. I had a glance at the public prosecutor report that was attached and asked my wife to translate it for me.

I couldn’t believe what I was hearing. Most of its content, related to my answer and behaviour during the questioning is totally false. I have prepared a very rough translation of it, which cannot be used for official quoting, but that will give all of you a sufficient idea. The report, among other things, states that I had refused to answer the questions about my background and my profession. This is a complete lie. I had answered very clearly and at length all the prosecutor’s questions, (except for the one about Olympic medals).

I must confess my very strong feeling that police and prosecutors are, more than in the quest for truth, on the hunt to hurt me.

Tomorrow I have agreed on attending yet another follow up questioning and have asked for a Swedish interpreter. I am not going to sign any papers!!!

My detention has already been reported to the Swedish Ministry of Foreign Affairs and I am going to ask my Swedish ambassador here in Tokyo to make a strong protest to The Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs and to The Japanese Ministry of Justice.

I’d like to thank all my good friends at FCCJ and others for their support in this scary, confusing and weird situation.
ENDS

————————————-
UPDATE: Per has since been called for a third round of “voluntary” questioning by the prosecutor. His sources say the prosecutor could demand he be sentenced to a year in jail for this!

“Human Rights” when enforced in Japan: Chest hair equals “sexual harassment”

mytest

Hi Blog. Here’s what happens when somebody in a position of authority (like a faceless boss at JR East) acts on what he or she katte ni considers “human rights”. Comment below article.

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

JR East links ‘naked festival’ posters to sexual harassment
Mainichi Shinbun January 8, 2008

http://mdn.mainichi.jp/national/news/20080108p2a00m0na012000c.html
oshuchesthair1.tiff
One of the rejected posters for the Somin Festival in Oshu, Iwate Prefecture.
(Screen capture courtesy Japan Probe)

OSHU, Iwate — East Japan Railway Co. (JR East) has rejected calls to stick up posters promoting a local “naked festival,” saying there are many women who aren’t comfortable seeing men naked.

The Oshu Municipal Government had sought permission from the Morioka branch of JR East to display the posters advertising Kokuseki Temple’s Somin Festival at stations, but JR East said the posters could not be displayed unless the images were changed.

“As sexual harassment becomes more of a problem, the standards for displaying posters in public spaces are becoming stricter,” a representative of the Morioka branch of JR East explained. “It wasn’t just that it was out of line because there was nakedness; the pictures showed things that were particularly unpleasant for women, such as chest hair, and it was decided that showing them things they didn’t want to see was sexual harassment.”

In the festival, crowds of men wearing nothing but loincloths participate in scrambles using sacks called sominbukuro. The festival, which has continued for about 1,000 years, is held in the hope of warding off plagues and producing bumper crops. This year, it will be held between the evening of Feb. 13 and early Feb. 14.

The poster in question combines three photos, showing a close-up of a bearded man with a hairy chest, and men in the background wearing loincloths.

The city retouched some of the loincloths, but decided that it would be difficult to completely alter images as JR had requested. It has reportedly decided to decrease the number of posters by about 200 to 1,400, and will display them in the city and in the Tokyo metropolitan area instead.

Oshu Municipal Government official Yuzuru Sasaki said that efforts to liven up the festival would continue in spite of the setback.

“The number of tourists might drop, but we want to display the posters in the city and ask tourist facilities in the metropolitan area to display them to pump up the festival,” he said.

Click here for the original Japanese story
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

COMMENT: How silly. I have written in depth on how vague the notion of human rights is in Japan (yes, it tends to be vague everywhere in the world, but what the GOJ considers human rights in its surveys is especially confusing, even discriminatory in itself!). Under half-baked concepts (where it’s okay to discriminate against NJ but not okay to ignore allegedly oversensitive people who might swoon in shock at stray muna-ge), it’s no wonder some people go over the top and construe something like “chest hair” as “sexual harassment”.

And the issue is chest hair, not nudity in itself. If you look at the previous year’s (approved) poster for the same event:
oshuchesthair2.tiff
(Screen capture courtesy Japan Probe)
you still have the same thing (it’s a festival celebrating male near-nakedness, after all)–fundoshi, asses–except no hairy chest in the foreground.

Better not ask even me to bare my semi-hirsute pecs, such as they are. And let’s see if JR East will enforce this on Sumo, and not allow broadcasts of matches on TVs on their premises. Same degree of nakedness (if not even more flesh)–and yes, before you say it–some sumo wrestlers have chest hair. Horrors!

There is a happy end to this, however. Thanks to the scoffing media coverage given this tempest in a teapot, this festival has gotten more publicity nationwide than ever before, and according to Sunday Japon January 13, 2007, they’re anticipating the highest level of attendance ever!

Mattaku mechakucha! Grow up, people. Chest hair isn’t, say, pubic hair–you might as well be offended by beards. Establish some concept of what real human rights are. That’s supposed to be the job of places like the absolutely useless MOJ Bureau of Human Rights…, and even if BOHR bothered to weigh in, they’ll only say, “we have no enforcement authority” and go back to soaking up tax monies for their own festivals. No wonder the public has trouble taking people who promote human rights seriously!

Sumo wrestlers, get your razors out! And there are some rikishi I would pay money to see get a Steve Carell-style body waxing… Debito in Sapporo

Ryan Hagglund on how he successfully dealt with an exclusionary landlord

mytest

Hi Blog. Turned 43 years old today… Here’s Ryan Hagglund of Yamagata on how he successfully dealt with a very common problem in Japan–exclusionary landlords.

As you probably know, if a landlord has a “thing” about foreigners and decides not to rent to you, legally there’s not a damn thing you can do about it. Racial discrimination is not illegal in Japan. But Ryan found a place he liked and wasn’t having any of it. And he managed to change the landlord’s (and realtor’s) mind.

How? Sticktoitiveness and accountability. Lessons: 1) be as polite as possible while being clear that you will not accept a denial based on being foreign, and 2) audio record everything just in case you have to go to court.

(Covert recordings are also admissible in court. I did it for the Otaru Onsens Lawsuit, and it removed any possible element of plausible deniability or misunderstanding.)

Good work Ryan. Here are the series of emails he sent to the Life in Japan List. Arudou Debito in Sapporo

///////////////////////////////////////

From: Ryan Hagglund
Subject: [LIFE IN JAPAN] Apartment Refusal
Date: December 4, 2007 10:10:00 PM JST

I have a quick question, if anyone can help. This afternoon the school I manage was told point-blank by the real estate agent we’ve been using that the apartment we had decided on for our new teacher is not available because the landlord doesn’t rent to foreigners, even if the company acts as the official tenant. We would like a chance to talk with the landlord, but the real estate company refuses to divulge any of his information. Is there any way to find out who the owner of an apartment building is? I would imagine there has to be some kind of public record out there. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you very much.

Ryan Hagglund, Yamagata

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////

UPDATE ONE

From: Ryan Hagglund
Subject: [LIFE IN JAPAN] Apartment Refusal
Date: December 5, 2007 8:21:40 PM JST

Thanks to everyone for the comments and thoughts so far. I thought I would write with a quick update and a little more background information.

Anyway, the whole situation started with a new teacher who needs housing accepting a position at our school. My wife, who is Japanese and works for the school, went apartment hunting while I was teaching and found a really great one. The real estate agent kept telling her how wonderful it was and she was right; it is by far the best apartment we have seen in the area for the price and in a good location too. We wanted the new teacher to have a chance to look at it, so my wife called to let the real estate know that her husband, me, and a new employee would be down to look at the apartment as well. Up to this point we had not said that the occupant would be a foreigner. We weren’t purposely trying to hide that fact by any means; we just hadn’t thought to mention it. It’s legally a non-issue anyway. When I arrived with the new teacher and came in saying we wanted to look at the apartment that had been played up for my wife, the agent was hesitant. She said she would show us it, but that “special permission” is required for foreigners to rent. I mentioned that such as policy was illegal and that we would like to see it. Aside from the comment about special permission, she was quite polite and pleasant, though I had to ask for her business card as she was walking back to her car to return to the office, something I thought was unusual. This all happened Saturday, just before the office closed. (All the above conversations happened in Japanese, by the way, though our new teacher doesn’t speak much at all.)

On Monday we called to confirm the apartment, but were told this afternoon that it is not available for rent by foreigners. When my wife asked to please speak with the landlord she was told that wasn’t possible. Following the suggestions on this list, my wife went to the city hall, but was told that they could not divulge private information on the ownership of a building. We decided, then, to return to the real estate agent. We were polite, letting her know we realize she is in a difficult situation, but that denying an apartment to someone simply because they are foreign is illegal, a conclusion with which our school’s attorney agrees. We said that we would like to speak with the landlord and were willing to work with him to find a suitable compromise, such as the school renting the apartment instead of the new teacher, but that we definitely wanted that apartment and feel it is very important for the law to be followed. (We also recorded the conversation so that we have proof that we were in fact denied based on being foreign.) The real estate agent said she would talk with landlord and get back to us, so we’ll se what happens. We’ve also scheduled a consultation with an attorney tomorrow to talk about our options in case the landlord refuses. I hope that won’t be necessary. Trying to be polite, but firm.

Ryan Hagglund, Yamagata

/////////////////////////////////////////////////

UPDATE TWO

From: Ryan Hagglund
Subject: [LIFE IN JAPAN] Re: Apartment Refusal
Date: December 17, 2007 12:07:44 AM JST

I want to thank everyone for their support, comments, and suggestions on the apartment situation we encountered. At least one person asked for updates, so I hope you don’t mind if I oblige.

As you may remember, my wife checked apartments through many realtors for a new employee for our school. We decided on the best one we could find, a nice, newer, spacious 1LDK with 9-foot ceilings; bar separating the kitchen from the dining area; three-panel, glass-inlaid sliding doors separating the kitchen and dining from the main room; outdoor storage connected to the balcony; hikari-fiber internet; and video intercom system for the front door in order to evade the NHK guy :-). All of this for 45,000 yen per month, which is a decent price in this area without all the extras. As the realtor had told my wife, “If I was looking for an apartment, I would live here.” We agreed.

When we told the realtor we wanted the apartment and it became apparent that it was for a foreigner, we were then refused since the apartment owner has apparently had problems with a foreigner in the past. We found the same apartment listed with another agent in the area who told us the same thing. We have one of the refusals recorded. Neither agent was the main listing agent for the apartment, however. We wanted to talk with the owner or main agent about the situation, but we were refused the information.

On the advice of one list member who wrote privately, I went to the houmukyoku to find the registered owner of the apartment, and my wife and I gave him a visit Thursday evening. We were very polite and asked him if we could talk to him about the problems he had previously had with foreigners, but he said he has no policy against renting to foreigners and would have no problems renting to us. He then (supposedly) called the main real estate agent and gave us the news that someone else was already interested in the apartment, though, telling us to check with them about the situation the next morning. We at least got the main listing agent’s name, however.

My wife, being the amazing woman she is, knew the agency and said the light had been on when we passed it on our way to the owner’s house. We hurried into the car and got to the agency just as they were about to close. When we told them why we were there, they said the owner had refused us and there was nothing they could do. They were extremely surprised to learn we had just spoken to the owner, leading us to believe the owner had just been pretending to be on the phone. They then said someone else was interested in the apartment, so we would have to wait for their decision. We made it very clear, however, that we had made our decision a full week-and-a-half prior and considered ourselves ahead of any other possible renters. To make an even longer story a little shorter, they kept giving us the runaround until we had countered all of their “reasons” for our not being able to rent to us and essentially trapped themselves in their own excuses and twisted logic. We recorded the exchanges with both the landlord and real estate office and I would love to post them sometime, as they are absolutely mind-boggling. In the end, though, they ran out of even semi-plausible excuses and we got the apartment.

I have to admit I’m somewhat dissatisfied with the fact that we will be giving these people money. There was definitely a concerted effort going on in the background to get rid of us. At the same time, it was definitely the best apartment available and our new teacher shouldn’t have to settle for second-best simply because she’s foreign. In the end, our polite determination won out. Next time we need an apartment, though, we’ll know to have a Japanese person look first at what’s available and then decide from there. We wouldn’t have been shown the best apartment otherwise, which is a real shame.

Ryan Hagglund
My English School
Higashine, Yamagata

///////////////////////////////////////////////

FINAL UPDATE

From: Ryan Hagglund
Subject: RESEND: Hi Ryan. May I blog your apartment report? Anything to add?
Date: January 11, 2008 10:35:07 PM JST
To: debito@debito.org

…Of course you may blog you like that I’ve reported to the Life in Japan list. I can’t think of anything at the moment to add to what I’ve written. I guess I would just emphasize that I made sure to be as polite as possible while being clear that I would not accept a denial based on being foreign… Thanks! Ryan

ENDS

Yomiuri: DPJ pushing bill for NJ voting rights in local elections

mytest

Hi Blog. Here’s some very good news. Somebody at least is recognizing the reality that you can’t keep people who live here permanently for generations permanently disenfranchised from the democratic process. One more reason to support the DPJ (or the New Komeito, depending on your politics–hopefully enticing it out of its Faustian deal with the devil just to share power with the LDP).

Wouldn’t it be interesting if in the end what made the LDP finally fall from power was issues of immigration and assimilation? Arudou Debito in Sapporo

====================================

DPJ lawmakers to push foreigner suffrage bill
The Yomiuri Shimbun, Jan. 7, 2008
http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/national/20080107TDY03102.htm
Courtesy of Chris Gunson

Lawmakers in the Democratic Party of Japan are stepping up efforts to resubmit a bill that would grant permanent foreign residents the right to vote in local elections, according to sources.

With New Komeito also strongly demanding local suffrage for permanent foreign residents, DPJ lawmakers hope in the upcoming Diet session “to split the ruling camp by submitting the bill to the House of Councillors and call on New Komeito to endorse it,” according to one of the sources.

But some conservative lawmakers in the party are determined to block the resubmission.

“Looking at this constitutionally and from the state of the nation, there’s no way we can approve this,” one party conservative said.

The DPJ previously submitted the bill to the House of Representatives on two occasions–in 1998 and 2002–but it was scrapped after failing to pass both times.

New Komeito also submitted to the lower house in 2005 a bill for granting permanent foreign residents voting rights in local elections, and discussions have spilled over into the current Diet session.

The passing of any bill of this nature has been stopped in its tracks mostly due to deep-rooted resistance mainly in the Liberal Democratic Party.

Yoshihiro Kawakami, a DPJ upper house member, plans to call on supporters in the party and establish a league of Diet members aimed at resubmitting the DPJ’s bill.

In the new bill, a “principle of reciprocity” will be introduced, in which local voting rights would only be granted to permanent residents who hold the nationality of a country that allows foreigners to vote in elections.

“New Komeito’s proposed bill has for sometime contained the principle of reciprocity, and so New Komeito won’t be able to oppose the DPJ’s bill,” Kawakami said.

Kawakami and his supporters hope to gain approval from the party leadership and submit the bill for prior consideration by the upper house. (Jan. 7, 2008)
ENDS

読売:外国人の地方参政権法案、民主内で再提出の動き

mytest

外国人の地方参政権法案、民主内で再提出の動き
 永住外国人に地方参政権を付与する法案を巡り、民主党内で次期通常国会に再提出を目指す動きが活発化してきた。
2008年1月5日21時23分 読売新聞
http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/politics/news/20080105ia22.htm

 地方参政権付与は公明党が強く求めており、「参院に民主党が法案を提出し、公明党に賛成を呼びかければ、与党の分断を図ることができる」との狙いからだ。ただ、党内の保守派議員は「憲法上も、国のあり方という観点からも、絶対に認められない」として阻止する構えだ。

 民主党は、同法案を1998年と2000年の2度にわたって衆院に提出したが、いずれも成立せず、廃案となった。一方、公明党は05年に衆院に「永住外国人地方選挙権付与法案」を提出、今国会でも継続審議になっている。自民党を中心に慎重論が根強いことが背景にある。

 民主党の川上義博参院議員は、党内の有志議員に呼びかけ、民主党案の再提出を目指す議員連盟を近く結成する方針だ。今回の法案には、相手国で外国人に対する選挙権を認めている場合にのみ、その国の国籍を持つ人に選挙権を付与する「相互主義」を新たに採用することを検討している。「公明党案にも、当分の間は相互主義をとることが盛り込まれており、公明党も民主党案に反対できなくなる」との判断がある。

 民主党の小沢代表は、「一定の要件のもとに地方参政権を与えるべきだ」と主張してきた経緯がある。川上氏らは、党執行部の賛同を得て、参院先議で法案を提出したい考えだ。

 これに対し、党内の保守派議員は「選挙権は、日本国籍を有する者に対してのみ保障されている。政局的な狙いから、『国のかたち』をゆがめるべきではない」と反発している。

(2008年1月5日21時23分 読売新聞)

Asahi: NPA Survey: 25% of hotels not following NPA demands to check “foreign guest” passports. Toyoko Inn not one of them.

mytest

Hi Blog. Here’s something I found rather interesting. A survey reported on the front page of the Asahi yesterday (courtesy Evan H., Matt, and H.O.) indicates that a quarter of major hotels nationwide sampled have qualms about asking NJ for their passports, and a third of them refused to copy them for police use. (No wonder–they can’t. By law they can only ask passports from NJ who have no addresses in Japan–meaning tourists.)

Hotels cite privacy reasons, and the problems and discomfort involved with explaining the rules to guests. Quite. Thank you. The Japanese article, however, notes that “some voices” (whoever they are) are noting the lack of punishment for noncooperating hotels (meaning we’ve got some legal holes to plug in the gaijin dragnet). Moreover, the survey was carried out by the National Police Agency. But you wouldn’t know either of these things if you read the English article only.

The two articles follow–the English translation, and the Japanese original. Note that the Japanese original is very specific in saying that “teijuu” NJ residents cannot be asked for their passports. However, the English translation omits that sentence entirely. And renders them misleadingly as “foreign guests”. Just like the NPA does. Wrong, wrong, wrong.

The translators (listed below as Seiji Iwata and Ichiro Noda) should be reprimanded for misinformation and unprofessionality. Feel free to express your opinion to the Asahi by email (they don’t have a comments page for the English site, but never mind–send in English if necessary) at http://www.asahi.com/reference/form.html

Meanwhile, there has been no reply from the Toyoko Inn chain regarding my letter re their reception in Hirosaki last November (asking me not only for my passport, but also proof that I’m even a Japanese). The head office in Tokyo had plenty of time to reply and say they’re concerned about customer complaints, and didn’t bother. So I say it again–don’t bother using the Toyoko Inn chain. Given their history towards other NJ clients, not to mention the handicapped, they don’t deserve your business.

The NPA indicates below that they will be cracking down on hotels who don’t “cooperate”. Expect more third-degree at Japanese hotels at check-in. Anyone want to create an information database for hotel and chains which follow the law properly, and confirm whether or not any and all guests are residents of Japan first before demanding their passports? Even a significant number of hotels aren’t happy with the oddly-enforced regulations. Arudou Debito in Sapporo

/////////////////////////////////////////////////

Survey: 1 in 4 hotels fails to record foreign guests
01/05/2008 BY SEIJI IWATA AND ICHIRO NODA, THE ASAHI SHIMBUN
http://www.asahi.com/english/Herald-asahi/TKY200801040263.html

One in four hotels and ryokan inns across Japan is not complying with government anti-terror initiatives that require them to record nationalities and passport numbers of foreign guests [sic], according to a survey.

Many hoteliers and inn owners say they are reluctant to do so for fear of treading on customers’ privacy.

The issue has taken on heightened importance in light of the Group of Eight summit to be held at Lake Toyako, Hokkaido, in July and fears of foreign terrorists infiltrating Japan.

The September survey of 33,000 hotels and ryokan inns was done to determine the level of compliance under the revised Hotel Business Law, according to the National Police Agency (NPA).

One in three hotels also failed to photocopy passports as directed by the government.

Many hotels said it is difficult to single out foreign guests. However, the agency has repeatedly asked hotels to check passports in light of the G-8 summit this summer.

“We want to ask all hotels to fully cooperate by April,” said an NPA spokesperson.

Because of the 9/11 terror attacks against the United States in 2001, the hotel law was amended in April 2005 to mandate hotels to record the nationalities and passport numbers of foreign guests, except for those with long-term residence status.

The law was originally enacted in 1948 to require hotels to record the names, addresses and occupations of all guests as a measure to prevent infectious diseases.

In addition to keeping proper records, the government has asked hotels to photocopy guests’ passports.

The survey targeted 33,000 hotels and inns which were deemed likely to be frequented by foreign visitors. There are 88,000 registered accommodations across Japan.

In several prefectures, more than half of hotels surveyed failed to write down the passport information.

The agency has refused to disclose survey results broken down by prefecture, saying that it may “let terrorists know the areas with poor security.”

Even in Hokkaido, which will host the G-8 summit, about 20 percent of hotels surveyed did not track the records.

Thanks to efforts by prefectural police, the figure fell about 10 percentage points in a follow-up survey conducted in November.

Prefectural police officials said small hotels tend not to have front desk clerks fluent in foreign languages and thus fail to obtain the information.

Since December, Hokkaido police have posted templates on their Web site for posters that publicize the requirements in English, Chinese, Korean and Russian so that hotel operators can download them for use at their facilities.

But an official at a Tokyo hotel said some customers are hesitant to let hotel clerks bring their passports to behind-the-counter clerk rooms to make photocopies.

“We don’t want to keep guests on business trips or group travelers waiting (while photocopies are taken),” said an official at a major U.S.-affiliated hotel chain.

“In addition, we find it difficult to explain why only foreign guests should have (their identity documents) photocopied,” the official said.

Reflecting these concerns, the Japan Ryokan Association, which has a membership of about 1,400 prestigious hotels and ryokan inns, asked the government in 2006 to stop requiring them to photocopy passports.

The NPA insists, however, that the records are needed for prompt cross-checks in case police obtain the identities of suspected terrorists before attacks take place.

“It will also play a crucial role in searching for the whereabouts of terrorists in case they commit an attack,” said an NPA official.

Emiko Iwasa, deputy counselor of the Japan Hotel Association, agrees that hotels should fully cooperate to “demonstrate that the country as a whole is fighting to prevent terrorism from occurring.”

Naofumi Miyasaka, an associate professor of international politics at the National Defense Academy of Japan, said the survey actually shows promising results, implying that an increasing number of hotels are now fully cooperating with the government’s anti-terrorism campaign.

“Hotels in Western countries usually cross-check identities of foreign guests, and if Japan fails to arrest terrorists or criminals on the international wanted list by allowing (hotels to) neglect an identity check, it will seriously damage the country’s credibility in the international community,” he said.(IHT/Asahi: January 5,2008)

/////////////////////////////////////////////////

Original Japanese, courtesy of H.O.:

宿の25%が旅券の記録せず 警察庁「テロ対策協力を」
朝日新聞 2008年01月04日15時54分
http://www.asahi.com/national/update/0104/TKY200801040150.html

01年の米国同時多発テロ以降の国際的なテロ情勢を受け、旅館業法施行規則で義務づけられた来日外国人の国籍と旅券番号の記録作業を、全国の主なホテル・旅館の4軒に1軒がやっていないことが警察庁の調査でわかった。罰則はないものの、宿泊現場では、客への配慮から徹底できないとの声がある。規則にはない旅券のコピー保存となると一層抵抗感が強い。半年後に迫った北海道洞爺湖サミットに向け、同庁はあらためて協力を求めている。

同法の本来の目的は感染症対策で、全宿泊者の氏名、住所、職業を宿泊者名簿に記録するように定めている。国際的なテロ対策強化を受け、 05年4月に外国人宿泊者については国籍と旅券番号の記録を義務づけるよう施行規則が改正された。本人確認が旅券でしかできないためで、定住外国人は除外されている。

今回の調査は昨年9月、警察庁の指示で各都道府県警が実施。全国のホテルなど約8万8000施設(06年3月現在)のうち、外国人が泊まる可能性があると判断した約3万3000を対象とした。

その結果、全体の4分の1が旅券番号などを記録していなかった。警察庁は「テロリストに手薄な場所を教えることになる」と都道府県別の結果の公表を拒むが、施設の半数以上が規則を守っていなかった県も複数あったという。

サミット首脳会議の会場となる北海道でも、国籍・旅券番号を記録していなかった施設は約20%あった。ただ、2カ月後の11月の再調査では約10ポイント改善したという。

道警は「一部の小規模業者は外国語を話せないなどの理由でお願いできないようだ」と話す。このため道は12月から、規則の内容を英語、中国語、韓国語、ロシア語で記したビラのひな型を、宿泊施設向けにホームページで公開している。

さらに、規則にはないが、国が通達で求めている旅券のコピーを取っていない施設も全国の3分の1にのぼっていたことも同調査で判明した。

日本ホテル協会の岩佐英美子副参事は「日本全体でテロ防止に取り組んでいるという姿勢を知らしめる効果は大きいはず」と理解を示す。

それでも都内のホテル担当者は「事務所に旅券を持ち込んで、コピーを取られることを嫌がる客がたまにいる」と話す。ある大手米系ホテルの担当者も「ビジネス客や団体客を待たせるのは申し訳ない。外国人だけコピーをとる理由の説明も難しい」と明かす。

そのため、フロントの負担軽減のためなどとして、国際観光旅館連盟が06年にコピーの省略を国に求めたこともある。

警察庁は「記録がなければ、テロリストが潜伏しているとの情報があっても旅券の照合ができないうえ、テロ発生後に追跡調査ができない恐れもある。4月までには全施設に協力をお願いしたい」としている。
ends

Japan Focus: Michael H. Fox translates Justice Minister Hatoyama interview re capital punishment

mytest

Hi Blog. I mentioned in my last Japan Times Article (December 18, 2007) the following oddity about our Justice Minister:

As the party cream floats to the top, debates become very closed-circuit, intellectually incestuous–and even oddly anti-gaijin. For example, Justice Minister Kunio “friend of a friend in al-Qaeda” Hatoyama was quoted as saying (Shuukan Asahi Oct 26, 2007 p. 122), “The Japanese place more importance on the value of life… European civilizations of power and war mean their concept of life is weaker than the Japanese. This is why they are moving towards abolishing the death penalty.” Then he approved three execution orders. Earth to Kunio, come in?

The thing is, there’s a lot more screwballity here. Here’s a link to the whole Shuukan Asahi interview I referred to translated by Michael H. Fox. I’ll excerpt Mike’s commentary here, but the interview is a long one, so I’ll let you go directly to the Japan Focus page for it.

Pretty remarkable opinions from a politico who has risen this far. Then again, as I’ve said, Japan’s parliament is a peerage in disguise, so for anyone who comes from a country with an inherited ensconced class, we all know what silly things their “upper-class twits” get up to. Pity they get elected and given this much unvetted political power here. Debito in Monbetsu
//////////////////////////////////////////////////

“Why I Support Executions”
An interview with Justice Minister Hatoyama Kunio
Translation and Commentary by Michael H. Fox
http://japanfocus.org/products/details/2609

COMMENTARY:

Hatoyama Kunio, current Justice Minister of Japan, is one of Japan’s most candid politicians. He has a penchant for speaking his mind, and startling the public, his party and even his ministry. In the wide ranging interview below, originally published in the weekly magazine Weekly Asahi (Shukan Asahi) on October 26 [2007], he sounds off on a number of timely and important issues regarding Japan’s justice system, particularly the death penalty, and upcoming changes to the socio-legal structure.

Hatoyama was born into a political dynasty. His father Seiichiro served in the Diet and was a Minister of Foreign Affairs. His grandfather Hatoyama Ichiro was Prime Minister from December 1954 to December 1956. And his great-grandfather Kazuo, served in the Diet and was president of Waseda University. His elder brother Yukio, is a Diet member and a leader of the opposition Minshuto (Democratic Party of Japan). According to his website, Hatoyama declared that he would enter politics when he was in the second year of elementary school. His wish started to materialize when he became a secretary to Prime Minister Tanaka Kakuei after graduating from Tokyo University’s Department of Law in 1972.

Hatoyama has had a long political career. Elected to the Diet in 1976, he has served as Education Minister and Labor Minister. He left the LDP in 1996, and was elected to the Diet as a Minshuto candidate. Three years later, he abandoned the party and resigned his seat in the Diet. He ran unsuccessfully for Governor of Tokyo in 1999. Soon after, he returned to the LDP and won a seat in the diet in 2000 under the system of proportional representation. He became Minister of Justice under previous Prime Minister Abe Shinzo in August of 2007, and continued in the post in the present cabinet of Prime Minister Fukuda Yasuo. At what turned out to be the last press conference for the Abe cabinet, he suggested that “executions should be carried out automatically without involving the Minister of Justice.”

The comment sent shock waves through the country. The last step in the long process of trying, sentencing and finally executing a convicted criminal is the signature of the minister of justice. Once signed, the execution of a death warrant must be carried out within five days. The justice minister’s involvement in the process is so critical that several of Hatoyama’s predecessors refused to carry out executions.

As a result of his reluctance to sign death warrants and a desire to continue executions, Hatoyama was widely criticized. Kamei Shizuka, a former director of the National Police Agency and LDP bigwig, now represents The People’s New Party in the diet. He was progenitor of the non-partisan Parliamentary League for the Abolition of the Death Penalty. Hosaka Nobuto, a member of the Social Democratic Party, is one of the country’s most progressive politicians and an outspoken opponent of the death penalty.

In addition to the death penalty, Hatoyama has voiced opinions on other areas of the criminal justice system, including the upcoming quasi-jury system for major criminal trials scheduled to begin in May 2009. Suspects charged with committing crimes that carry a sentence of three years or more will have the right to a jury composed of three sitting judges and six citizens. While supporting the quasi-jury system, in this interview he attacks the policy of increasing the number of attorneys in Japan’s severely under-lawyered society. Currently, approximately 1,200 people, or roughly two percent of candidates pass the National Bar Exam and begin careers as lawyers, prosecutors, or judges. This number is scheduled to grow to 3,000 in the near future as the first crop of students graduate from newly established law schools.

Also mentioned in the interview is the Toyama Rape Case, a now infamous miscarriage of justice. In 2002, a man was wrongly convicted of rape and attempted rape in Toyama Prefecture and served twenty-five months in prison before being exonerated this year when the real culprit confessed. The conviction was based on a coerced confession and the suppression of exculpatory evidence. This case has galvanized public opinion and stimulated the need for greater transparency in police investigations, especially the filming of interrogations.

Hatoyama suggests that executions should be carried out automatically after an objective examination by a third party who will “review the transcripts.” However, no such system has ever been proposed or even discussed in Japan. The idea of an objective third party seems to be a face-saving measure designed to deflect the storm of criticism that followed Hatoyama’s comments. He also suggests that executions should only be carried out after retrial requests and petitions for amnesty have been exhausted. The Japanese Code of Criminal Procedure does not limit retrial requests — Sakae Menda, the first Japanese man freed from death row – went through six retrials. Likewise, the mention of amnesties is irrelevant: none have been granted since the mid 1970’s.

Other Hatoyama comments are puzzling. He mentions that “some countries do not even have laws banning jeopardy” as if to infer that Japan is superior in this respect. Though Article 39 of the constitution prohibits double jeopardy, the prosecution in Japan may appeal any verdict, and almost always appeals innocent verdicts and sentences considered too light. Likewise, his statement that “in Japan there is a right to silence, but in England, if you keep silent, this means you acknowledge guilt.” In fact the complete opposite is true. Silence in Japan is considered an acknowledgement of guilt.

Hatoyama’s preference for reducing the number of lawyers is reactionary and contrary to his ministry’s policy. The increase occurred after a long process of judicial policy making involving the Japan Federation of Bar Associations, the Ministry of Justice, the Ministry of Education (which has set up law schools) and Parliament. All agreed that Japan has far too few lawyers, and is ill equipped for dealing with the complexities of International business law.

Hatoyama, like many of his LDP colleagues, has capitalized on the mostly docile electorate. An increase in lawyers, despite the pressing need, will certainly agitate this mind set. His comment about lawyers being unable to find work in contemporary Japan is completely askew from reality. His opinions indicate a deep mistrust of empowering the public and independent legal policy, and strong support for top-down decision making and bureaucratic control.

Just over a month after this interview was originally published, Hatoyama demonstrated his resolve to execute: three convicts, two in Tokyo and one in Osaka, were hung on December 7. Hatoyama’s imprint on the process was clear. In a clear break with previous policy, the ministry openly announced the names of the executed, and the crimes leading to conviction. From 1998, the ministry only announced the number of executions, omitting all other details. Before 1998, there were not even any announcements. In both cases the names of the executed were revealed only to attorneys and designated guarantors of the accused. These parties were charged with directly informing the press, or informing the public indirectly through the offices of Amnesty International.

The dramatic increase in executions –thirteen– over the last 12 months signifies a departure from policy. Double digit hangings in such a span have not occurred since 1975.

The flurry has generated a shock-wave of concern in a society trying to grapple with a rapidly ageing population: three of those executed have been over age 70. Akiyama Yoshimitsu, one of four convicts hung on Christmas Day 2006, became the oldest person executed in post-war Japan. Aged 77 and quite infirm, he was transported to the gallows in a wheel chair. Ikemoto Noboru, executed in Osaka on December 7th, was hung two weeks before his 75th birthday. Originally sentenced to life imprisonment, his sentence was raised to death upon appeal. Had the government allowed the original sentence to stand, Ikemoto would most likely have been paroled in 2006, eighteen years into his sentence.

INTERVIEW:
Go to
http://japanfocus.org/products/details/2609
ENDS

Patricia Aliperti & Catherine Makino on NJ Sexual Slavery/Human Trafficking in Japan

mytest

Hi Blog. Here is a situation covered only infrequently by the media and by the likes of Debito.org (mainly because there is so little public information out there, and it’s a topic I’m not at liberty to research myself)–how sex trafficking, particularly that involving non-Japanese, is a flourishing business. And how Japan is one of the world’s major trading posts for it.

I’ve dealt with issues of slavery before (to this day, it exists in just about every country on the planet), but Japan’s has always had a wink-wink attitude towards the water trades–even by Prime Ministers regarding Japan’s historical connections–and especially when it comes to its particularly nasty variant involving foreigners. NJ “entertainers” (there was even an official visa category for it) are in a much weaker position linguistically (language barrier), economically (in more desperate straits) and legally (NJ have visas, meaning bosses can use denial of visa status as a further means for forcing compliance). This means it took gaiatsu (i.e. an unfavorable report from the US State Department) before the GOJ actually did anything meaningful about it.

Older article from Catherine Makino follows. And if you hope or think the situation has improved, check out this incredible Powerpoint presentation by Ms. Patricia Aliperti, Rotary World Peace Fellow at the International Christian University in Tokyo, which she gave me after a speech I attended at the Peace as a Global Language Conference in Kyoto last October 27:

https://www.debito.org/HumanTraffickingShortPresentation.ppt

Breathtaking in its breadth and depth, it will open your eyes to the issue. Arudou Debito in Sapporo

////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Japan Installs Caution Signal for Sex Traffic
Run Date: 07/18/05
By Catherine Makino WeNews correspondent
http://www.womensenews.org/article.cfm/dyn/aid/2378/context/archive
Courtesy of Aly Rustom

Japan has revised its criminal law to stipulate human trafficking as a crime and punish those involved. Activists, however, remain alarmed by foreign-staffed sex parlors that have made the country a haven for traffickers.

TOKYO (WOMENSENEWS)–There are about 10,000 parlors in Japan that offer sex to patrons.

Many advertise that they have foreign women by using such names as Filipina Pub, Russian Bar or Thai Delight. The patrons pay $60 to $100 for drinks and then an additional $150 to $300 to take women out of the bar to have sex with them.

Most of these women come to Japan on falsified passports or with entertainer or short-term visas, says Hidenori Sakanaka, who until a year ago was the director of the Tokyo Immigration Bureau. They are told that they have to pay off fake debts and their passports often are taken away upon arrival in Japan. The women are beaten and controlled by threats to family members in their home countries.

“Most women are moved from place to place and are too scared to complain,” Sakanaka says.

Sakanaka, who now directs the Japan Aid Association for North Korean Returnees, is credited with pushing through revisions to the law to combat trafficking while in his former post. Passed by the National Diet last month, it has helped abate international concerns about a country that has long been criticized for a too-tolerant an approach to trafficking.

On Saturday, the National Police Agency said police had uncovered 29 cases of human trafficking of foreign women from January to the end of June, up by five from the same period last year.

Despite these and other promising moves by Japan–brought about in part by the activism of Japanese women’s groups–international and local advocates continue to worry about the country’s problem with human trafficking, the world’s third-largest underworld business after trade in drugs and arms, netting $9.5 billion annually.

In a recent report the Japan Network against Trafficking in Persons said that the government’s heightened anti-trafficking efforts had so far not “made a dent.”

Fact-Finding Mission Last Week

Last week, Sigma Huda, the special rapporteur on trafficking for the U.N. Commission on Human Rights, came here on an unofficial fact-finding mission with activists, lawyers, lawmakers, academics and others concerned about human trafficking. The visit followed widespread reports–including by Amnesty International Japan–of South Asian women from developing nations being trafficked in this highly developed country.

“It’s the dark side of globalization,” says Huda, who is based in Bangladesh.

Reports indicate that about 130,000 women come to Japan on entertainer visas every year, but only about 10 percent of them actually perform in legitimate shows at hotels and other venues. Many obtain entertainment visas through agents who recruit them to Japan with promises of jobs that don’t exist.

Sakanaka traces the problem to immigration officials who bend to politicians and businessmen who hire foreign women for illicit purposes. “Some men even said I was out of my mind to try to do something about human trafficking,” he says. “They claimed it was part of Japanese culture to have sex with foreign women. They were addicted to the parlors. I received phone calls from politicians and anonymous threats on my life.”

Japan Kept Off Worst-Trafficker List

Earlier this month, the U.S. State department removed Japan from a special watch list of countries that were to be included on an updated listed as the worst condoners of human trafficking after the Japanese government compiled an action program to combat human traffickers. The State Department had put Japan on that list a year ago.

Under the new Japanese legislation, those who “purchase” people in order to control their activities will face punishment of up to five years in prison. The maximum punishment could be increased to seven years imprisonment if the victim is a minor.

The new legislation will also grant victims, on a case-by-case basis, special residency status even if they have overstayed their original visa, so that they can be rehabilitated.

Before these revisions, police dealt with trafficking by arresting the victims as illegal aliens, jailing them and deporting them as soon as they had enough money to fly home. Traffickers received a fine or a short jail sentence.

One of the most notorious traffickers, Koichi Hagiwara, known as Sony for his habit of videotaping his victims while he humiliated and tortured them, was sentenced in March 2003 and served less than two years in prison for violating labor laws.

Japanese Women Enraged

Japanese women have also pressured the government to do something about human trafficking.

“Many women were enraged by an article in the Asahi Shimbun, a major daily newspaper in Japan, about the practice,” says Sakanaka, the former director of the Immigration Bureau, referring to an investigative article published Oct. 18, 2003. “Until this article came out, Japanese women knew little about the situation. Women’s groups mobilized, and called up magazines and newspapers to protest the treatment of the women victims.”

The government, Sakanaka says, has neglected to investigate many of the abuse cases. These women, he says, live horrific, lonely lives, forced into having unprotected sex and perform other risky acts with dozens of customers a day. “These new laws are valuable. But they also need to strike at the center of organized crime.”

Sakanaka is concerned that most foreign women will be too scared to go to the police because they think they will be killed if they try to escape.

Chieko Tatsumi, an official in the International Organized Crime Division of Japan’s Foreign Ministry, disagrees. She believes the victims would seek protection from the police.

“There has already been an increase in the number of women asking for protection,” Tatsumi says. “In 2002, there were only two Thais who sought help, but in 2004 there were 25.”

She says that the government set a budget of $100,000 in April for helping women who come to a public shelter.

“The government will pay for rehabilitation for the victims of sexual enslavement and tickets for them to return to their home countries,” Tatsumi says. Not enough, says Sono[ko] Kawakami, campaign manager for Victims of Violence of Japan Amnesty International. The government’s measures fail to sufficiently protect victims and the amount of money budgeted to stop trafficking is insufficient, she says.

Her organization wants separate facilities for trafficking victims, rather than housing them with victims of domestic violence. Many victims are so traumatized that they won’t talk to anyone, so they require specialists to handle them, Kawakami says. Since many do not speak Japanese she also wants language translation support for the victims and specialists in human trafficking to assist them.

Although she believes the government can do more, she says the revisions to the criminal law affecting trafficking are a good start.
Keiko Otsu, director of Asian Women’s Shelter in Tokyo, is also pleased with the new laws, but says there are currently only two shelters available for these women.

“The women don’t have any income, assistance or support,” she says. “Some may be pregnant and many have mental and other health problems, including AIDs and other sexually transmitted diseases and need expensive medial care.”

Catherine Makino is a freelance writer in Tokyo. She has written for San Francisco Chronicle, the Japan Times, The Asian Wall Street Journal and the China Morning Post.

For more information:

Japan Network Against Trafficking in Persons:
http://jnatip.blogspot.com
International Organization for Migration:
http://www.iom.int/
ENDS

mpeg movies squirtthing movie sweetestbeast teen moviesmovies teenytitmans moviesused cars movievoyer movieswelivetogether.com movies Map

IMADR: Connect Mag on UN Human Rights Council’s first year

mytest

Hi Blog. Here’s a synopsis from Tokyo human rights group IMADR of how the new UN Human Rights Council is doing over its first year of existence. This has been discussed on Debito.org at the following links:

=================
Economist: UN Human Rights Council in trouble (Posted on Thursday, March 29th, 2007)

A LOT of optimism attended the birth of the UN Human Rights Council, created last year by a 170-4 vote of the General Assembly. Whereas the United States kept on the sidelines (and confirmed this month it would stay away), many Western states saw the new body as an improvement on the discredited Human Rights Commission it replaced. But now some of the commission’s critics are fretting that the Geneva-based council may prove only a little better, or perhaps even worse, than its predecessor…
https://www.debito.org/?p=297

Economist: UN Human Rights Council “adrift on human rights” (Posted on Tuesday, April 17th, 2007)

I’ve been trying to get an opportunity to speak at the UN HRC regarding the Otaru Onsens Case, yet these articles from the Economist keep coming out and offering bad news about the meetings I’ve missed. Would be nice to believe that human rights, from the organization which has established some of the most important conventions and treaties in history, still matter in this day when rules seem grey, and even the most powerful country in the world dismisses long-standing international agreements as “outmoded” and “quaint”…
https://www.debito.org/?p=344

UN.ORG on pushes to make sure HRC holds all countries accountable (Posted on Wednesday, July 25th, 2007)

The UN News has been issuing press releases to make sure the Human Rights Council doesn’t become as emasculated as the former Human Rights Commission–by holding all countries accountable with periodic reviews of their human rights records. Good. Japan in particular is particularly remiss, given its quest for a seat on the UNSC without upholding its treaty obligations…
https://www.debito.org/?p=470

UN News: UNHCR urges HRC to begin reviews of every country’s human rights record (Posted on Saturday, September 15th, 2007)

UN News agency press release reports: United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour today urged the Human Rights Council to press forward with its Universal Periodic Review (UPR) mechanism, which allows the human rights records of every country to be scrutinized. Under this new mechanism, over the course of four years, all UN Member States – at the rate of 48 a year – will be reviewed to assess whether they have fulfilled their human rights obligations.
https://www.debito.org/?p=574

=================
Here’s IMADR. Arudou Debito in Sapporo
(click on image to expand in your browser)
imadrconnectsept2007001.jpg

imadrconnectsept2007002.jpg

imadrconnectsept2007003.jpg

imadrconnectsept2007004.jpg
ENDS

Japan Times: My Dec 18 Zeit Gist column on premeditated xenophobia in Japan

mytest

Hello Blog. Here’s the last Japan Times column I’ll do this year–and it’s a doozy. I’m very happy with how it came out, and judging by the feedback I’ve gotten others are too.

It’s about how Japan’s xenophobia is in fact by public policy design, due to unchallenged policymakers and peerage politicians, and how it’s actually hurting our country. Have a read if you haven’t already.

Best wishes for the holiday season, Arudou Debito in Sapporo, Japan

=====================================

“THE MYOPIC STATE WE’RE IN”

Fingerprint scheme exposes xenophobic, short-sighted trend in government

By ARUDOU DEBITO

THE JAPAN TIMES COMMUNITY PAGE

Column 42 for The Zeit Gist, Tuesday, Dec. 18, 2007

“Director’s Cut” of the article with links to sources at

https://www.debito.org/japantimes121807.html

Excellent illustration by Chris MacKenzie at the Japan Times website at

http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/fl20071218zg.html

We all notice it eventually: how nice individual Japanese people are, yet how cold — even discriminatory — officialdom is toward non-Japanese (NJ). This dichotomy is often passed off as something “cultural” (a category people tend to assign anything they can’t understand), but recent events have demonstrated there is in fact a grand design. This design is visible in government policies and public rhetoric, hard-wiring the public into fearing and blaming foreigners.

Start with the “us” and “them” binary language of official government pronouncements: how “our country” (“wagakuni”) must develop policy for the sake of our “citizens” (“kokumin”) toward foreign “visitors” (rarely “residents”); how foreigners bring discrimination upon themselves, what with their “different languages, religions, and lifestyle customs” an’ all; and how everyone has inalienable human rights in Japan — except the aliens.

The atmosphere wasn’t always so hostile. During the bubble economy of the late ’80s and its aftermath, the official mantra was “kokusaika” (internationalization), where NJ were given leeway as misunderstood outsiders.

But in 2000, kicked off by Tokyo Gov. Shintaro Ishihara’s “sangokujin” speech — in which he called on the Self-Defense Forces to round up foreigners during natural disasters in case they riot — the general attitude shifted perceptibly from benign neglect to downright antipathy….

==============

REST AT

https://www.debito.org/japantimes121807.html

http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/fl20071218zg.html

ENDS

Yomiuri: GOJ to forbid employers from confiscating NJ passports

mytest

Hi Blog. Here’s some good news.

After much trouble with employers confiscating NJ worker passports (ostensible reasons given in the article, but much of the time it led to abuses, even slavery, with the passport retained as a Sword of Damocles to elicit compliance from workers), the GOJ looks like it will finally make the practice expressly illegal.

About time–a passport is the property of the issuing government, and not something a foreign government (or another person) can impound indefinitely. The fact that it’s been used as a weapon to keep the foreign Trainee laborer in line for nearly two decades speaks volumes about the GOJ’s will to protect people’s rights once they get here.

Glad this is finally coming on the books. Now let’s hope it gets enforced. Referential articles follow Yomiuri article:

========================

Govt guidelines to forbid firms to keep foreign trainees’ passports
The Yomiuri Shimbun, Dec 18, 2007
http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/national/20071218TDY01307.htm
Courtesy Jeff Korpa and Mark Schreiber

The Justice Ministry looks set to stop companies that accept foreign trainees from confiscating trainees’ passports and foreign registration certificates, ministry sources said Monday.

The toughened ministry guidelines for host companies also state that preventing foreign trainees from traveling wherever they wish to go when they are off duty is unacceptable. Firms have been curtailing the movement of workers and holding on to passports and certificates to prevent such trainees from disappearing.

The ministry will likely release the guidelines this week and will notify organizations, including commerce and industry associations, that accept foreign trainees of the new rules.

The foreign trainee system was designed to enhance international relations by introducing foreign trainees to new technology and skills, but it often has been misused as an excuse to bring unskilled workers into the country.

Commerce and industry associations and organizations of small and midsize companies accept foreign trainees, who are introduced to companies to learn skills for up to three years.

Under the current system, foreign trainees receive one year of training followed by two years as on-the-job trainees. As the training year is not considered employment, such workers are not protected by the Labor Standards Law.

The new guidelines for the entry and stay management of foreign trainees are a revised version of the 1999 guidelines.

The new guidelines prohibit host companies from using improper methods to manage foreign trainees, such as holding their passports, and foreign nationals from being accepted through brokering organizations other than via authorized organizations

Also banned are misleading advertisements for the recruitment of host companies, such as those that say foreign trainees can be used to resolve a labor shortage.

The tougher regulations are aimed at preventing commerce and industry associations from becoming nominal organizations for accepting foreign trainees. This practice has seen brokering organizations exploit foreign trainees by introducing them to companies.

To prevent overseas dispatch organizations from exploiting foreign trainees, the new guidelines also include a measure that requires host companies to refuse to accept foreign trainees in the event a foreign dispatch organization is found to have asked them to pay a large deposit. The guidelines have been revised for the first time in eight years because companies that do not not qualify to take on foreign trainees have been taking a rapidly increasing number of such workers.
==========================
ARTICLE ENDS

REFERENTIAL ARTICLES:
Japan scheme ‘abuses foreign workers’
By Chris Hogg BBC News, Tokyo, Wednesday, 3 October 2007
https://www.debito.org/?p=681

EXPLOITING VIETNAMESE Apocalypse now
Japan Times Sunday, April 29, 2007 By MARK SCHREIBER Shukan Kinyobi (April 20)
https://www.debito.org/?p=619

POINT OF VIEW/ Hiroshi Tanaka: Japan must open its arms to foreign workers
07/03/2007 THE ASAHI SHIMBUN
https://www.debito.org/?p=478

Nearly 10,000 foreigners disappear from job training sites in Japan 2002-2006
JAPAN TODAY.COM/KYODO NEWS Monday, July 2, 2007
https://www.debito.org/?p=475

Govt split over foreign trainee program
Yomiuri Shimbun May 19, 2007

https://www.debito.org/?p=435
For starters…
Arudou Debito in Sapporo
ENDS

Himu Case: Tokyo District Court orders Sankei Shinbun to pay NJ damages for reporting erroneous al-Qaeda link

mytest

Hi Blog. We’ve had enough rotten news recently. Now for some good news.

A Bangladeshi by the name of Islam Himu (whom I’ve met–he’s on my mailing lists) was accused during the al-Qaeda Scare of 2005 of being part of a terrorist cell. And the media, particularly the Sankei, reported him by name as such. Detained for more than a month by the cops, he emerged to find his reputation in tatters, his business rent asunder, and his life irrevocably changed.

This is why you don’t report rumor as fact in the established media. And as we saw in the Sasebo Shootings a few days ago, the papers and the powers that be won’t take reponsibility even when they get it wrong.

So Mr Himu sued the Sankei. And won. Congratulations. A good precedent. Now if only could get the Japanese police to take responsibility when they overdo things. Well, we can dream.

News article, referential Japan Times piece, and other background follows. Arudou Debito in Sapporo

================================

Sankei newspaper ordered to compensate foreigner over Al Qaeda slur
(Mainichi Japan) December 11, 2007
http://mdn.mainichi.jp/national/news/20071211p2a00m0na027000c.html

The Sankei newspaper has been ordered by the Tokyo District Court to pay a foreigner 3.3 million yen in compensation for implying he was linked to Al Qaeda and plotting a terrorist attack.

The court found the paper had defamed 37-year-old company president Islam Mohamed Himu of Toda, Saitama Prefecture, and ordered it to compensate him.

“It was inappropriate to publish his name,” Presiding Judge Hitomi Akiyoshi said as she handed down the ruling.

Sankei officials said they were not sure how the company will react to the case.

“We want to take a close look at the ruling before deciding how to respond,” a Sankei spokesman said.

Court records showed that Himu was arrested in 2004 for forgery and fined 300,000 yen. The day after his arrest, the Sankei ran a front page story under the headline “Underground bank produces terror funds, man with links to top terrorists arrested.”

Sankei proceeded to write that Himu had links to high-ranking Al Qaeda members and was suspected of involvement in procuring funds for terrorism.
ENDS
==================================

Alleged al-Qaeda link seeks vindication
Bangladeshi wants apology, claims he was falsely accused by police, press
The Japan Times April 2, 2005
http://search.japantimes.co.jp/print/nn20050402f4.html

A Bangladeshi businessman who was incorrectly alleged by police and the media last year as being linked to the al-Qaeda terrorist network is seeking vindication.

Investigators held Islam Mohamed Himu for 43 days but ultimately found he had no links to al-Qaeda.

Himu said that even since being freed, he has struggled to get his life and business back on track. He has filed a complaint of human rights violations with the Japan Federation of Bar Associations.

“I want to ask senior officials of the government or police: what was my fault?” Himu said in an interview.

“The Japanese police and media have destroyed my life,” said the 34-year-old, who runs a telecommunications company in Tokyo.

“I want them to apologize and restore my life,” he said, urging the government to help him obtain visas to make business trips to several countries that have barred his entry following the allegations.

Himu came to Japan in 1995 with his Japanese wife, whom he had met in Canada. After establishing a firm in Tokyo that mainly sells prepaid international phone cards, he obtained permanent residency in 2000.

Police arrested him last May 26 and issued a fresh warrant June 16. They alleged he had falsified a corporate registration and illegally hired two employees, including his brother.

While in custody, investigators mostly asked if he had any links to al-Qaeda, noting that a Frenchman suspected of being in al-Qaeda bought prepaid phone cards from him several times, according to Himu.

He said he tried to prove he had no connection with terrorists, telling police the Frenchman was one of several hundred customers and he had no idea the man used an alias.

However, police dismissed his claim, he said, and leaked to major media organizations, including Kyodo, their suspicions that he was involved with al-Qaeda, and all of them reported the allegations.

Himu said he believes police arrested him as a scapegoat even though they knew he had no link with al-Qaeda.

He was nabbed shortly after the media reported that the Frenchman had stayed in Japan in 2002 and 2003.

Prosecutors did not indict him on the first charge, while a court fined him 300,000 yen on the second charge. He was released on July 7.

Himu said the prosecutors’ failure to indict proves he was not an al-Qaeda member, but it did not necessarily constitute a public apology.

All his employees left following the release of the sketchy police information, and he now has 120 million yen in debts due to the disruption of his business, he claimed.

The Japan Times: Saturday, April 2, 2005

=============================

REFERENTIAL LINK:
Japan Times and Asia Times articles on 2004 police Al-Qaeda witch hunt, Himu Case, and police detentions in Japan.
https://www.debito.org/japantimes102305detentions.html

ENDS

アルカイダ報道:産経新聞に330万円賠償命令 東京地裁

mytest

アルカイダ報道:産経新聞に330万円賠償命令 東京地裁
毎日新聞 2007年12月10日 19時48分 (最終更新時間 12月10日 20時48分)
http://mainichi.jp/select/jiken/news/20071211k0000m040054000c.html
 国際テロ組織アルカイダと関係があると実名報道され名誉を傷付けられたとして、バングラデシュ国籍の会社社長、イスラム・モハメッド・ヒムさん(37)=埼玉県戸田市=らが産経新聞社に330万円の賠償を求めた訴訟で東京地裁は10日、全額支払いを命じた。秋吉仁美裁判長は「慎重な裏付け取材を続ける必要があった。少なくとも実名報道は妥当ではない」と指摘した。 

 判決によるとヒムさんは04年、電磁的公正証書原本不実記録容疑などで逮捕され、出入国管理法違反で罰金30万円の略式命令を受けた。産経新聞は逮捕翌日に1面で「地下銀行でテロ資金 幹部と接触男を逮捕」との見出しで、ヒムさんがアルカイダ幹部と接触し、テロ資金の送金に関与した疑いがあるなどと報じた。【高倉友彰】
ENDS

UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights 60th Anniversary Dec 10, 2007

mytest

HUMAN RIGHTS ENSHRINED IN UN DECLARATION APPLY UNIVERSALLY, SAYS BAN KI-MOON
Courtesy UN News New York, Dec 10 2007 4:00PM

The freedoms upheld in the historic United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights must be enjoyed by everyone, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said today on the occasion of Human Rights Day.

The Day also kicked off a year-long UN system-wide campaign, with the theme “Dignity and Justice for All of Us,” to raise awareness of the Declaration, which turns 60 on 10 December 2008.

“The Declaration remains as relevant today as it did on the day it was adopted,” Mr. Ban said. “But the fundamental freedoms enshrined in it are still not a reality for everyone. Too often, Governments lack the political will to implement international norms they have willingly accepted.”

He said that this year leading up to the 60th anniversary of the landmark document provides an opportunity to reinvigorate efforts to ensure that the Declaration’s freedoms apply to all.

“It is a chance to ensure that these rights are a living reality – that they are known, understood and enjoyed by everyone, everywhere,” the Secretary-General noted. “It is often those who most need their human rights protected, who also need to be informed that the Declaration exists – and that it exists for them.”

UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour, in a separate message, paid tribute to those who have given their lives in the pursuit of transforming the ideals of the Declaration – inherent human dignity, justice, non-discrimination, equality, fairness and universality – into reality.

“Today is also the day to reflect upon our individual and collective failures to stand up against violence, racism, xenophobia, torture, repression of unpopular views and injustices of all sorts,” she observed.

Efforts to make sure that every person can rely on just laws for his or her protection must be stepped up in the year leading up to the Declaration’s 60th anniversary, the High Commissioner said.

“In today’s growing divisions between the rich and the poor, the powerful and the vulnerable, the technologically advanced and the illiterate, the aggressors and the victims, the relevance of the Declaration and the universality of enshrined rights need to be loudly reaffirmed,” she declared.

The President of the General Assembly also sounded the alarm about those who are denied the Declaration’s rights, stating that “it is incumbent upon us to champion their cause.”

Srgjan Kerim urged that measures to promote rights should “live up to the spirit embodied by those who had the courage and conviction to leave us with this great legacy.”

Underscoring the rights of girls and women, who continue to be subjected to discrimination and violence, the head of the UN Population Fund (UNFPA) stressed that “every human being should be able to live and make decisions free of coercion, discrimination and violence.”

Executive Director Thoraya Ahmed Obaid pointed out that although it has been long-recognized that all couples and individuals have a right to decide whether and when to have children, some 200 million women worldwide have no access to modern contraception.

She also noted that while the right to health has similarly long been recognized, a woman dies every minute during pregnancy and childbirth because of lack of maternal health services.

The UN’s independent rights experts marked the Day with a call for the elimination of the twin scourges of discrimination and exclusion.

“Discrimination continues to distort the economic, social and political contours of societies,” the UN special procedures mandate holders – ranging from rapporteurs and experts to working groups – said in a joint statement. “Individuals and communities face discrimination and exclusion on the basis of their race, ethnicity, religion, language, sex or sexual orientation amongst many other grounds.”

The group emphasized that if left unchecked, the consequences of discrimination and exclusion “can begin to create fault lines within society between those who have full rights, justice and dignity respected, and those who do not.”

Events commemorating the Day are taking place throughout the world. At UN Headquarters today, panel discussions on human rights will be held, while a special celebration was held at the world body’s Geneva office, where the Office for the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Human Rights Council are based.

An essay competition for teenagers is being held on the occasion of the Day in Parwan province, north of Afghanistan’s capital Kabul. Meanwhile, in Paktia province, the UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) celebrated the Day at an event attended by victims of the country’s three decades of conflict, Government authorities, tribal officials and the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC).

The UN Mission in Sudan (UNMIS) has organized a series of activities across the country, including workshops, campaigns and panel discussions in Darfur, as well as marches to promote human rights messages in southern Sudan.

Several events will also be taking place in the lead up to the 60th anniversary of the Declaration. In Rome, illustrations inspired by Human Rights Day by 17 artists from around the world will be exhibited as part of an initiative called “Cartooning for Human Rights.” The artwork will travel around the world next year.

Next September, a conference to celebrate the Declaration will be held in Paris, while a series of five human rights capacity-building trainings will take place in the Asia-Pacific region next year as part of the Diplomacy Training Programme, a non-governmental organization (NGO) founded by Nobel Peace Prize laureate José Ramos-Horta.
2007-12-10 00:00:00.000
ends

UN News: UNHCR dismayed by secret death penalty of J convicts

mytest

Hi Blog. This is tangental to Debito.org, as it involves issues of the death penalty, not internationalization and multiculturalization. But it’s yet another example of Japan not following treaties. Do read to the very end, and goggle at a comment from Justice Minister Hatoyama…

//////////////////////////////////

TOP UN HUMAN RIGHTS OFFICIAL DISMAYED BY EXECUTION OF THREE JAPANESE PRISONERS
UN News.org. New York, Dec 7 2007 7:00PM
Courtesy UNNews AT un.org

The top United Nations human rights official today deplored the execution of three prisoners – including one aged over 75 – in Osaka, Japan, and appealed to the East Asian nation to reassess its approach to the death penalty.

The executions reportedly took place suddenly and neither the convicts nor their families were given advance warning.

“This practice is problematic under international law, and I call on Japan to reconsider its approach in this regard,” Louise Arbour, the High Commissioner for Human Rights, said.

Expressing particularly dismay at the execution of the prisoner over the age of 75, she said that “it is difficult to see what legitimate purpose is served by carrying out such executions of the elderly, and at the very least on humanitarian grounds, I would urge Japan to refrain from such action.”

In contrast to carrying out executions in secret as it has done in the past, Japan publicly released the names of those executed, the High Commissioner noted.

Japan is a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which legally obligates States Parties to ensure strict safeguards when applying the death penalty. It is widely accepted that executions cannot be carried out in secret and without warning, as this could be seen as inhuman punishment and treatment under the ICCPR.

Ms. Arbour urged the Japanese Government to implement a moratorium on executions or ban the practice altogether, as a growing number of nations have.
2007-12-07 00:00:00.000
ENDS

//////////////////////////////////

COMMENT: And this is where our Justice Minister, Hatoyama “al-Qaeda” Kunio, was referring to about the higher value put on life in Japan than in the West? I included this in an earlier Newsletter, but it bears repeating:

========================================
Interview with Justice Minister Kunio Hatoyama
Shuukan Asahi, October 26, 2007 P.122.
Title: “The Reason I will carry out Executions.”

Partial translation by Michael H. Fox, Director, Japan Death Penalty Information Center
http://www.jdpic.org

Q: There is a big trend to abolish the death penalty worldwide. Why do you want to keep it in Japan?

HATOYAMA: The Japanese place so much importance on the value of life, so it is thought that one should pay with one’s life after taking the life of another. You see, the Western nations are civilizations based on power and war. So, conversely, things are moving against the death penalty. This is an important point to understand. The so called civilizations of power and war are opposite (from us). From incipient stages, their conception of the value of life is weaker than the Japanese. Therefore, they are moving toward abolishment of the death penalty. It is important that this discourse on civilizations be understood.
========================================

Go figure.
The entire article translated with commentary by Michael H. Fox was recently published on Japan Focus. See
http://japanfocus.org/products/details/2609
Debito in Sapporo

Hokkaido Shinbun Editorial and article on NJ Fingerprinting Debacle

mytest

Hi Blog. Finally got around to translating this, sorry for the wait. Two articles from the Hokkaido Shinbun, Japan’s largest regional newspaper with near-monopoly readership in Hokkaido. Despite trying to sit on the fence when it came to The Otaru “Japanese Only” Onsens Case (1999-2005), this time they come out quite clearly with misgivings about the NJ Fingerprinting thingie. Editorial first, article second–the latter depicting the Korean media giving Japan a lot of stick.

Why do I get the feeling that the editors are reading Debito.org? Ki no sei? Debito in Sapporo

=================================
LACKING IN CONSIDERATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS
The new Immigration procedures
Hokkaido Shinbun top editorial Tuesday, November 20, 2007, Morning Edition page 3
Original Japanese at https://www.debito.org/?p=821
Translated by Arudou Debito

Starting from today, a system requiring fingerprints and facial photos from Japanese coming to Japan comes into effect.

The goal is to stop terrorism. The fingerprints and photos will be instantly checked against a blacklist of terrorists and criminals, and if there is a problem, people will be refused entry at the border.

We understand the point of refusing terrorists at the shores. However, questions still remain about human rights, particularly privacy, when fingerprinting most of the 7,000,000 non-Japanese annually who come to Japan as if they were criminal suspects.

The bureaucrats in charge must not make decisions arbitrarily or on political grounds.

The system is grounded upon the amended Immigration and Refugee Control Act. We call for prudence when carrying out this policy:

First of all, there is nothing in the law which says how long these fingerprints or photos will be saved in a database. Immigration explains that “If we say how long, terrorists will wait until the end of the time limit and come in then.”

Although Japan is only the second country to create this biometric data program, after the United States, in America at least the time period for data storage is set at 75 years. That’s a person’s lifetime.

It is not inconceivable that the Japanese police will use this data in their criminal investigations. Chances are high that personal data will be leaked. We say that after the data is instantly checked against the database, it should be deleted immediately.

Second, the new powers granted the Minister of Justice under this amended law, to force people seen as “potential terrorists with the ability to easily carry out terrorist acts” (tero no jikkou o youi ni suru koui o okonau osore ga aru) to leave Japan’s borders, must be used properly.

Justice Minister Hatoyama Kunio said in a speech about these new regulations that a “friend of a friend of his is a member of al-Qaeda”. He was allegedly warned that there would be a terrorist bombing in Bali, Indonesia, two months before the event, and told to stay away.

But it is far too careless to assert that this person was indeed a member of al-Qaeda just based upon hearsay from a friend. If the Minister on this basis alone wishes to use his power to deport people, this is an abuse of his powers.

Third, the accuracy of this Blacklist they are putting together. In America, one out of every 500 citizens is now recorded on their blacklist as a terrorist suspect. It is said that even Nobel Peace Prize recipient Nelson Mandela is on it, and won’t be able to enter the United States.

All foreigners entering or leaving Japan [sic], except the Special Permanent Residents and children under 16, are to be targeted under this new system. That means 70% of all foreigners in Hokkaido. It won’t do to have our residents [shimin–meaning the editor is including NJ] mistakenly put on this list.

On the other hand, last month as an amendment to the employment laws, employers are now required to register the names and visa statuses of all their foreign workers gaining or changing employment. Now there is a systematic legal apparatus for administrating foreigners and all their personal information from entry through employment.

This apparently aims to reduce the number of illegal entrants, but having this strong an administration system is quite likely to increase foreigners’ ill feelings towards Japan. We must make sure that this inspection doesn’t result in violations of human rights.

ENDS
=================================

FINGERPRINTING, NEW IMMIGRATION SYSTEM STARTS
KOREAN TOURISTS DISPLEASED
MEDIA: “VIOLATIONS OF HUMAN RIGHTS”
Hokkaido Shinbun November 21, 2007
Translated by Arudou Debito

SUMMARY: A new Immigration system was brought on line on Nov 20 “for barring terrorists from entry”. In principle, this applies to foreigners over the age of 16 coming into Japan, where they will have their fingerprints and mug shots taken. Several vocally irate tourists were spotted at the international entry port at Chitose Airport. Korean media, the source of many of Japan’s tourists, was critical in its reporting, and the trend of public opinion may create the danger of a diplomatic flap.

———————–

Over the course of the day, 9 flights, including charters from Korea and Taiwan, brought about 1000 foreign tourists into Hokkaido. Korean tourist Kim Yong Gyun (65), who flew in from Pusan to Chitose, said with a bewildered look, “It’s not as if I feel good about having my fingerprints taken.” Machines were also breaking down, causing some consternation.

A semiconductor engineer from Seoul (37) did not contain his disdain. “This isn’t for catching terrorists. It’s for tightening the noose around overstayers. There’s absolutely no explanation whether or not they’ll protect our biometric data.”

Sapporo Immigration dealt with this with an emergency beefing up of inspection staff at Asahikawa, Hakodate, and Obihiro airports. Even then, at Hakodate Airport, a Korean Air flight of about 150 people were held up for an hour and 15 minutes, reckoned at about twice the usual duration. An airline staff member expressed his worry about the weekend, when the planes would actually be full.

On the other hands, the governments of their respective countries are withholding comment on the new system. Last year, of all the 410,000 total entrants into Hokkaido, the top group, at 134,000 people were Taiwanese, with Koreans coming in second. Both these countries have deep-rooted dislikes of Japan.

The Ministry of Justice sent representatives in October to the Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, and asked for their understanding. Both Japanese and Korean diplomats were advising prudence towards possible ill-feelings.

The Korean media on Nov 20 all reported in unison this state of affairs. The online edition of The Hankyoreh Shinbum reported an angry arrival at Narita Airport saying, “Foreigners are being treated as criminal reinforcements; this is a violation of human rights.” Kim Dae Hyung, Tokyo correspondent, reported, “Korea is still relatively unaware of what’s going on over here, but as far as human rights are concerned, this is very problematic. The Korean Government might be holding its tongue for the sake of good relations, but in reality they are watching public opinion.”

=========================

SIDEBAR
Several people trigger alarm for having history of deportation
Obihiro, other places have trouble reading fingerprints.

A new system was brought online on Nov 20, where foreigners over the age of 16 must have their fingerprints and mug shots taken. As of 5PM Nov 20, according to the Ministry of Justice, several people have tripped the database for having fingerprints matching those of previously deported people, which has raised several questions (gimon ten ga shoujiru).

These people were asked more details later, and there is a chance they might be deported.

In addition, the Justice Ministry announced that at Obihiro, Narita, Chubu International, Fukuoka and Hakata, a total of 21 people were unable to have their fingerprints scanned. They say their fingers were too worn down, as they were elderly people.
=========================
ENDS

J Times: UNHCR’s Guterres bravely spins on Japan’s exclusionary refugee policy

mytest

Hi Blog. The United Nations drops in, and tries to put a brave face on Japan’s inability to accept refugees or asylum seekers like any other developed country. Stressing improvements when there really aren’t any. He’s a diplomat, all right. Debito in Sapporo

===============================

UNHCR chief pitches third-country resettlement
By KAHO SHIMIZU Staff writer
The Japan Times November 29, 2007
http://search.japantimes.co.jp/print/nn20071129a5.html

Japan is notorious for accepting very few refugees, despite making a significant financial contribution to the office of the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees.

But the visiting head of the U.N. organization said Tuesday that Japan is making steady progress in improving the situation facing asylum seekers here.

“Japan is not a country with many refugees . . . but the asylum system is moving in the right direction,” U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees Antonio Guterres told reporters during his three-day visit to Tokyo.

After arriving Monday, Guterres met with government officials, including Justice Minister Kunio Hatoyama and Foreign Minister Masahiko Komura, and left the country Wednesday morning.

Japan was the UNHCR’s third-largest donor country in 2006, with a $75 million (¥8.1 billion) contribution, after being the second-largest donor for eight years through 2005.

However, the number of people granted refugee status in Japan remains small. In 2006, the government recognized only 34 people as refugees, compared with 23,296 in the U.S. and 6,330 in Britain.

Since assuming the top position at the UNHCR in 2005, Guterres, 58, said he has witnessed some improvements in Japan. These include the introduction of an appeal system to review cases of people whose applications for refugee status have been turned down, and the move by authorities to grant protection for people whose applications have been rejected but are allowed to stay for humanitarian reasons.

Above all, the most encouraging development for Guterres was that Japan has begun discussing the possible introduction of the third-country resettlement program, which means accepting refugees who sought asylum in other countries.

The UNHCR views resettlement in a third country as an important tool of protection and a durable solution for refugees, especially when voluntary repatriation to their home countries and local integration are difficult.

In September, the government set up a working group involving officials of the Justice Ministry, Foreign Ministry and other bodies, and began studying the program.

The U.S., Canada and Australia were among the first countries that began offering third-country resettlement opportunities, but although countries in South America, including Brazil and Argentina, recently introduced such a system, no Asian country has done so.

Guterres said he felt there is political will from the Justice Ministry and the Foreign Ministry to introduce the system because they are making a serious analysis of conditions to bring it about.

“We would very much appreciate that (if Japan becomes) the first Asian country to install the program,” Guterres said. But at the same time, the former Portuguese prime minister said the UNHCR does not want Japan to rush, nor is it necessary for Japan to accept a great number of refugees from the beginning, because the U.N. organization wants a system that really works to help asylum seekers.

People’s awareness about refugees in Japan is relatively low due in part to its geographical location, but Guterres said he was encouraged by growing interest among young people.

The Japan Times: Thursday, Nov. 29, 2007
ENDS

「人権週間」法務省の強調事項・有道 出人の批評

mytest

Hi Blog. Sent this out to my Japanese lists. Debito

「人権週間」法務省の強調事項・有道 出人の批評

 みなさまこんにちは。有道 出人です。いつもお世話になっております。

 さて、ご存知かどうかは分かりませんが、今週は「人権週間」でございます。法務省と全国人権擁護委員連合会は税金を使って色々なイベントを開催します。ただ、有意義であるのか、効果的であるのか、ましてや根本的にどんなような「主義」に基づき差別撤廃・意識高揚を行うのか、をこのメールで私は批評したいと思います。(私のコメントは引用するテキストの後です。)

 先ず、行政官からこの「人権週間」の目的についての説明を引用します:

出典:http://www.moj.go.jp/JINKEN/jinken03.html
=========================
○人権週間とは?
 国際連合は,昭和23年(1948年)第3回総会で世界人権宣言が採択されたのを記念し,昭和25年(1950年)第5回総会において,世界人権宣言が採択された12月10日を人権デーと定めるとともに,すべての加盟国にこれを記念する行事を実施するよう呼びかけています。法務省と全国人権擁護委員連合会は,世界人権宣言が採択された翌年の昭和24年から毎年12月10日の人権デーを最終日とする1週間を人権週間と定め,人権尊重思想の普及高揚のための啓発活動を全国的に展開しています。
一日人権擁護委員による街頭啓発 (甲府地方法務局)

人権イメージキャラクター人KENまもる君・あゆみちゃんが小泉総理大臣(当時)を表敬訪問し、総理と共に人権の大切さを訴える
「第59回 人権週間」強調事項(抜粋)
ーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーー
○「育てよう 一人一人の 人権意識」
_○「女性の人権を守ろう」 __ 
○「子どもの人権を守ろう」 __
○「高齢者を大切にする心を育てよう」 __ 
○「障害のある人の完全参加と平等を実現しよう」 __ 
○「部落差別をなくそう」 __ 
○「アイヌの人々に対する理解を深めよう」 __ 
○「外国人の人権を尊重しよう」 __
○「HIV感染者やハンセン病患者等に対する偏見をなくそう」 __
○「刑を終えて出所した人に対する偏見をなくそう」 __ 
○「犯罪被害者とその家族の人権に配慮しよう」 __
○「インターネットを悪用した人権侵害は止めよう」 __ 
○「性的指向を理由とする差別をなくそう」 __ 
○「ホームレスに対する偏見をなくそう」 __ 
○「性同一性障害を理由とする差別をなくそう」 __ 
○「北朝鮮当局による人権侵害問題に対する認識を深めよう」 __

強調事項の詳細についてはこちら。
http://www.moj.go.jp/JINKEN/jinken03-01.html
ーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーー
=========================

詳細からDebito.orgは特に認識していることについて、こう書いてあります:
出典:http://www.moj.go.jp/JINKEN/jinken03-01.html
=========================
○「外国人の人権を尊重しよう」

 近年の国際化時代を反映して,我が国に在留する外国人は年々急増しています。憲法は,権利の性質上,日本国民のみを対象としていると解されるものを除き,我が国に在留する外国人についても,等しく基本的人権の享有を保障していますが,現実には,我が国の歴史的経緯に由来する在日韓国・朝鮮人をめぐる問題のほか,言語,宗教,生活習慣等の違いから,外国人に対する就労差別やアパートやマンションへの入居拒否,飲食店等への入店拒否,公衆浴場での入浴拒否など様々な人権問題が発生しています。
 平成8年1月には,「あらゆる形態の人種差別の撤廃に関する条約」(人種差別撤廃条約)が我が国において発効し,人種差別や外国人差別等あらゆる差別の解消のための更なる取組が求められています。
 今後ますます国際化が進むことが予想される状況の中で,外国人のもつ文化を尊重し,その多様性を受け容れることが,国際社会の一員として望まれています。
 法務省の人権擁護機関としても,国民のすべてが,国内・国外を問わず,あらゆる人権問題についての理解と認識を深め,真に国際化時代にふさわしい人権意識をはぐくむよう啓発活動を展開していきます。
=========================

有道 出人よりコメント:
もちろん、人権週間を開催しないよりも、した方がいいと思います。ただ、上記のテキストの中では、色々な面から人権が委ねている人権擁護部の盲点が現れています。

1)なぜ上記の文で「人種差別・身元差別」などではなく『外国人差別』のみと言われていますか。『国籍』が要因ですか。それだけではなく、国際結婚の子供は「日本人離れ」の顔があるならば、「外人扱い」になるケースがかなりある。日本人・日本国籍が有する人であるので、これは「外国人差別」に該当しません。これは人種差別です。これも「真に国際化時代」の一部です。人種差別は日本人にも悪影響となります。私は以前いくらでも人権擁護部に注意してもきかないです。

2)なぜ「我が国」に外国人が「在留」しているのみとの言い方ですか。「我々対外国」なら、外国人は「住民」ではないみたい。短期的な「在留」よりも「在住」や納税や社会貢献についてもう少し言及できませんしょうか。それこそ「多様性を受け容れること」だと思います。

3)なぜ「言語,宗教,生活習慣等の違い」が排他的の行動の説明になるのでしょうか。必ずしも違いがあるわけではいし、習慣などの違いがあったという証拠がなくても「外国人」は外見・身元のみで門前払いするケースが多いです。かえって「違いがあるから」を主張するのはたいてい差別主義者の弁解となり、同様に政府もそうやって言及するのは若干皮肉です。「習慣が違っても他国の人はちゃんと学べる」ことも無視となります。

4)人権擁護部がよく「尊重しよう」と言うが、なぜ人種差別撤廃法整備も唱えませんか。96年から「遅滞なく法律も作る」と国連条約で公約したものの、ほぼ12年間が経過しても「外国人差別」を撤廃措置と機能は行政府には未だにありません。人権擁護部さえ自分が「差別撤廃の拘束力はない」と認め、よって、立法がないと綺麗言葉に留まることとなりました。
https://www.debito.org/policeapology.html

要は、この「人権週間」は国連に伝えるようなアリバイ的な措置に留まるだけではないと信じたいですが。
https://www.debito.org/japanvsunj.html
税金の無駄遣いではないとも信じたいですが、頑張ります。
宜しくお願い致します。有道 出人
debito@debito.org
https://www.debito.org/nihongo.html
December 5, 2007
ENDS

GOJ Jinken Shuukan: “Human Rights Week” and its flaws

mytest

Hi Blog. If you’ve been watching TV or been out in a few public places, you might have seen two cute-ish big boy and girl mascot dolls named “Ken” (for “kenri”, one’s rights, or “jinken”, human rights), drawing attention to issues of discrimination in Japan. Otherwise you might not know that we are in the middle of Japan’s official week for human rights. “Jinken Shuukan” started on December 3 and ends on December 10, or “Jinken Day”. Sponsored by the notorious Ministry of Justice’s Bureau of Human Rights (Jinken Yougo Bu, or BOHR–“notorious” for doing nothing much otherwise).

The website with this year’s 59th proceedings (thanks Stephanie) lists up these issues of note (my translations):
http://www.moj.go.jp/JINKEN/jinken03.html
========================
1) Teaching people one by one about the importance of human rights.
2) Human rights for women.
3) For children.
4) For the elderly.
5) For the disabled.
6) For the Burakumin.
7) For the Ainu.
8) For foreigners.
9) For people with AIDS or Hansen’s Disease (leprosy).
10) For formerly incarcerated criminals who have paid their debt to society.
11) For victims of crime and their families.
12) For the victims of human rights abuses on the Internet.
13) For people discriminated against for their sexual orientation.
14) For the homeless.
15) For those with Gender Identity Disorder.
16) For those who have suffered human rights abuses from the DPRK.

========================

As far as Debito.org goes, here is what they say about their goals towards discrimination against “foreigners” (gaikokujin) on a page with a longer writeup: (again, my translation):

========================
“LET’S RESPECT THE HUMAN RIGHTS OF FOREIGNERS”

Reflecting the era of Japan’s Internationalization in recent years, every year the number of foreigners staying (zairyuu) in our country (sic–waga kuni) has been increasing. According to the Constitution, and by the nature of the rights of man, and leaving out the interpretation that the Constitution only applies to Japanese citizens, foreigners staying in our country also are guaranteed fundamental human rights. However, in practice, our country has had issues originating in history towards the Zainichi North and South Koreans [sic–Chinese/Taiwanese etc. not included]. There are also various incidents of human rights problems with foreigners facing discrimination in the workplace, as well as being refused apartments, entry into eating and drinking establishments, and public baths [thanks]. This is due to differences in language, religion, and lifestyle customs [sic–not also race].

Our country effected the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination in January 1996, which demands that we take further action towards the elimination of racial discrimination and discrimination by nationality.

As Japan’s internationalization is anticipated to further proceed from now on, it is desirable that we respect the customs of foreigners, and as a member of the international society we accept diversity.

The Ministry of Justice Bureau of Human Rights as an organization will develop enlightenment activities that will cultivate an awareness of human rights suitable for Japan’s international era, where all citizens (kokumin) here or abroad will deepen their understanding and awarenesss of all human rights problems.
========================

COMMENT: I’m not going to completely douse the fireworks here with acerbic comments (as it’s better that the GOJ is doing this than not, as long as they don’t claim to international bodies that this is enough–which they have a history of doing). But let’s do a quick roundup of the flaws in all the “human rights awareness” so ably called for by the BOHR:

a) Note how the BOHR still couches discrimination in terms of nationality, not as race or national origin. For what about the Japanese children with international roots, who face discrimination because they don’t “look Japanese”? This blind spot ignores one more facet of Japan’s true internationalization–where racial discrimination affects Japanese citizens too.

b) Note how the issue is still couched in terms of “us” and “them”–our citizens and those foreigners with their differences (which is not necessarily true–and this sort of thing is used more often as an excuse and a justification than an explanation). It’s not even clear that foreigners are even residents of Japan–only “staying” (zairyuu) as opposed to “residing” (zaijuu).

c) Still no call from the BOHR for an actual law outlawing racial discrimination–only for the “respect” for people (which, with 300 yen, might get you a cup of coffee; if the restaurant even lets you in).

d) And as I said above, the BOHR is famous for calling for action yet not effecting much (or any) action of its own–after all, as they will tell you at the very beginning of any interview you have with them over a human rights issue, they have no real power to stop a discriminator from discriminating, and (this they won’t tell you) have no legal obligation to call you back or tell you any results of any investigation (if any) they undertake (this is, they say, “for privacy concerns”). See what I mean at
https://www.debito.org/policeapology.html).

Glad to see that “discrimination against foreigners” is now up to eighth in the ranking. Now if we could get it rendered as “racial discrimination”, it would more reflect reality. And treaty obligation.

Arudou Debito in Sapporo
================
More Keystone Coppiness regarding GOJ human rights awareness:
“Human rights survey stinks: Government effort riddled with bias, bad science”
By Arudou Debito. The Japan Times, Tuesday, October 23, 2007
https://www.debito.org/japantimes102307.html
ENDS