Japanese Goverment (1991-)
|
Lawsuit Against Japanese Goverment (1991-) |
1 Compensation demand based on Justice and Fairness (Jouri)
Jouri originally meant to be the "fundamental principle of justice
and fairness."Saiban-kan-jimu-kokoroe-sanjo (Code of Conduct for Judges
) (19th C.) states that "In civil court, when there is no law, the
judge must depend on the precedents. When there are no precedents, he must
depend on Jouri." In war compensation trials in which plaintiffs accuse
the state of its crimes, one of the major difficulties is the lack of appropriate
law. For example, the State Tort Liability Act is in effect now, but is
limited for the present government. It does not apply for the Japanese government
before the end of WWII. In this trial, the plaintiff side argument does
not put its basis in any law that is in effect now, but in "Jouri"
itself, the concept that has been in existence since the Meiji Restoration.
2 Compensation demand based on the violated contract between the Koreans
and the Japanese government.
Almost all the ex-Korean BC class war criminals including the plaintiffs
are civilians. Then, they were forced to apply for the prison guard position
through flattery, order and threat. They had no choice but become prison
guards. In official records, however, they applied for the job, and there
remains the written contract. They were told that their term was two years
and they would receive 50 yen per month. But the promise was not fulfilled:
they were forced to work even after two years. As a result, a number of
Korean and Taiwanese prison guards were accused of war crimes of which they
were not responsible. These cases all boil down to the violation of contract
by the Japanese government.
3 Request for an official apology based on the Japanese government's
criminal activities
The Japanese government engendered such a situation in which the Koreans
were blamed for war crimes. As a result, they were called "collaborator
of Japanese" in Korea. We believe that the Japanese government has
an obligation to restore their honor. In this trial, the plaintiff side
demands that the prime minister write an official apology to each plaintiff.
4 Request for recognition of illegality of the failure to legislate
a necessary law
Recognition of illegality of lack of compensatory law is such that the judicature
recognizes the illegality of the fact that the Japanese government has not
established any compensatory law. The court has repeatedly used the "theory
of legislature's responsibility." This means that it is the legislature's
function to establish a law and the function of judicature is limited within
the scope of the already established laws. In this trial, in which the violation
of human rights by the state is being argued, we expect that the court clarifies
the notion that the lack of certain law causes human rights violation.
Proceedings at the prefectural court and the lower-court judgement
Return to HOME