国連レポート


第29会期女性差別撤廃委員会作業部会(ニューヨーク国連本部、2003年2月3日)に国際女性の地位協会が提出した、NGOカウンターレポートの重点項目を英訳した要約版です。

Introduction (About JAIWR)
Japanese Association of International Women's Rights (JAIWR) is the organization established for the purpose of research and promotion of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (hereunder Convention). The organization has been paying special attention to the consideration of Japanese reports by the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW). Since its foundation in September 1987, the organization sent its representatives to monitor the Committee's consideration of Japanese initial report in January 1988 and the combined consideration of second and third periodic reports in 1994. JAIWR also analyzed Japanese periodic reports to the CEDAW and published its comments along with complete text of each report, with permission from the Cabinet Office (formerly the Prime Minister's Office), and summary of consideration by the CEDAW in its annual journal. The organization's comments on the Japanese second periodic report were translated into English and delivered to the Committee members.
JAIWR held a series of meetings to analyze the contents of the Japanese fifth periodic report in 2002. The following is an excerpt of the organization's analysis of the report. The comments are stated according to the order of articles of the Convention. Final English report shall be delivered before the 29th session begins.

Please contact us (contact info on the cover page) your e-mail or mailing address if you would like to have this report in advance.

*JAIWR have also called upon to organize a national network of NGOs to come together and voice their concerns to the CEDAW experts in this opportunity. A number of NGOs gathered in December 2002 and is now working together as the Japan NGO Network. Series of national events are planned to gather the voices of grass roots women and to make the Convention better and widely known.


(JAIWR's chairperson is Ryoko Akamatsu, former CEDAW expert from 1987 to 1994.)
General Introduction
1. Since the second consideration of Japanese reports in 1994, there have been many positive changes in order to better implement requirements of the Convention in Japan, including establishment of the Basic Law for Gender- Equal Society and the Law for the Prevention of Spousal Violence and the Protection of Victims as well as strengthening the national machinery. These positive changes were, in a sense, brought out by the influence of the NGO Forum that had been held in conjunction with the Fourth World Conference on Women in 1995 where 5,536 Japanese women had participated. In addition, many local governments have formulated ordinances to promote gender equality (38 prefectures and 79 cities, wards, and towns as of October 2002) which have made favorable impact on the society by putting gender equality on local agenda. However, at the same time, the fact that "backlash" brought by conservative parties in the process of formulating such ordinances should not be neglected.
2. According to the "Human Development Report 2002", Japan is ranked ninth (9th) in the world with the Human Development Index (HDI) but thirty-second (32nd) with the Gender Empowerment Measures (GEM). This is the indication that the Committee's Concluding Comment made at paragraph 630 of U.N. Doc. A/50/38 has not been implemented. Japanese Government should seriously consider the comment and take necessary measures.
3. JAIWR welcomed that Japanese Government tried to accept inputs from NGOs in the process of drafting its fifth periodic report to the CEDAW. However, more substantial discussion with NGOs should have taken place according to the Committee's Concluding Comments (A/50/38).
4. Japanese report should have been organized according to each articles of the Convention, stating current situations, analysis of the situation, and measures taken (for example, in the case of Article 2). In addition, the Japanese official translation of the Article 3 of the Convention uses the Japanese word "nouryoku kaihatsu" (means "capability development") for the term "development", which resulted in a misleading description on Article 3 in the report.
5. Japanese NGOs are hoping with much enthusiasm that Japanese Government ratifies the Optional Protocol to the Convention and take necessary procedure to accept the revision of Clause 1, Article 20 of the Convention immediately.
Article 2 Obligations of State Parties
1. We welcome the establishment of the Basic Law for Gender-Equal Society and the First Basic Plan for Gender Equality based on the Law in order to implement the requirements stipulated in (a), (b), and (c) of the Article 2 of the Convention. We consider this is the greatest achievement made by the partnership between Japanese Government and NGOs since the United Nations Decade for Women. Article 4 on the Consideration to Social Systems or Practices, Article 15 on the Consideration in Formulation of Policies, Etc., and Article 17 on the Handling Complaints, Etc. of the Basic Law describe key issues for changing the Japanese gender order that is indispensable to attain de facto equality. Therefore, we would like to urge Japanese Government to take immediate and effective action to implement such articles of the Basic Law.
2. Prefectures, cities, wards, and towns throughout Japan have been establishing ordinances to build a gender equal society. Most of them are aiming to realize gender equal society with their residents involved, based on principles of the Convention and the Basic Law, taking the increasing local autonomy as well as characteristics of the locality into consideration. However, some conservative local representatives have been placing political pressure on local assemblies to include expressions in such ordinances that are not compatible with the principles of the Convention and the Basic Law. NGOs have been working actively against such "backlash" and we would like to ask the Government to take appropriate measures against the backlash. We also hope the CEDAW makes comments on this matter.
3. [The issue known as "Wartime Comfort Women"] Among the four (4) countries where the Asian Women's Fund (AWF) provided atonement money individually to the former "wartime comfort women", the governments of the Republic of Korea and Taiwan refused to accept this money. In addition, quite a few victims in all four countries refused to receive it, claiming for official apologies and compensation by the Government of Japan. Furthermore, there are countries that are not included in the list to provide AWF money.
As the Japanese social trend leaning toward the right, the description of "comfort women" has been deleted in three (3) of the eight (8) titles of the officially approved textbooks of history for junior high school. The other titles either do not use the words "comfort women" or contain only brief descriptions about the issue. "The Women's International War Crimes Tribunal on Japanese Military Sexual Slavery" was held by NGO in December 2000, and its final decision was given in December 2001. Although various issues yet remain to be solved with regard to the compensation, measures also should be taken to prevent this issue from recurring.
4. [Ratification to the Optional Protocol to the Convention] The Government of Japan has pronounced that it violates "independence of the judiciary" if the CEDAW makes a decision contrary to the judgment of the Supreme Court of Japan in the procedure based on the Optional Protocol. However, CEDAW's decision will not constitute an issue of "independence of the judiciary", as it will not make the domestic judgment invalid. The Government should identify the practical issues concerning the new communications system of CEDAW in relations to the Japanese judicial system and immediately take necessary measures to ratify the Optional Protocol as soon as possible.

Possible Questions regarding Article 2
(1) Is the government taking any measures against the arising movement of "backlash" against the gender equality?
(2) Is the Government making any effort to have a meaningful debate with the NGOs regarding how to implement the Convention?
(3) What is the reason that the Japanese government has not yet ratified the Optional Protocol? What are the obstacles and the steps taken by the administration in order to ratify the Optional Protocol?
(4) Please explain in details the Handling Complaints System mentioned in the Article 17 of the Basic Law for Gender-Equal Society.
(5) What is the current status of the issue on "wartime comfort women (military sexual slavery)"? How is it treated in the text books?
(6) Please explain in details what is done as a gender education for judges and people in the judicial system?

Article 4 Special Measures not to be Considered Discriminatory
1. Article 20 of the Eual Employment Opportunity Law (the EEOL) rely on the voluntary action of the employer for the implementation of positive action in the workplace. The law states that the government may support those employer who chooses to implement the positive action. However, for example, Gender Equality Ordinance of Kanagawa prefecture requires all the workplace employing over 300 employees to report the status of advancement in gender equal actions so that the governor may order the improvement to those workplaces with unsatisfactory results on the promotion of gender equality. The EEOL shall also make it an obligation for the employers to report the status of promotion of gender equality.

Possible Questions regarding Article 4
Current initiative by the public and private entities mentioned in the 5th report shows the lack of enforcement power. Does the government have a plan to require employers to report the results of their gender equality action?

Article 5 Elimination of Gendered-Role based Practices
(Please refer to Article13)
Article 7 Equality in Political and Public Activities
1. Positive action is recognized as a possible measure to redress existing gender imbalance in the Basic Law for a Gender-Equal Society. However, it has not been applied in any political field, nor does the Basic Plan for Gender Equality include any policy or system for the advancement of women in politics at the National Diet and local assemblies. In addition, political parties have not been very successful in actively promoting women's participation in politics.
With the introduction of a non-binding open-list formula into the proportional representation portion of Upper House elections, the ratio of women legislators declined from 17.1% to 15.4% after the Upper House election of 2001.
Each party should actively promote the positive action stipulated in the Basic Law. In addition, a new law for a more balanced representation of women and men in legislation should be formulated.
Article 10 The Elimination of Discrimination in Education
1. The fact that the Japanese report includes no specific description on measures taken in school education reflects the reality in Japan where no active efforts have been made in this field. Specific measures based on gender perspectives such as development of educational materials, studies of teaching methods, reviews of school management and school events, and counseling on class choices and career guidance at school have not been taken. No specific measure has been taken to enable a student to choose an occupation without being affected by gender-based stereotypes.
2. The government has not shown a clear attitude toward the promotion of coeducation in public senior high schools. Coeducation in Japan was implemented in accordance with Article 5 of the Fundamental Law of Education of 1945. More than fifty years later, all-girls or all-boys public senior high schools still exist in Japan. As stipulated in Article 10 (c) of the Convention, promoting coeducation is necessary in all fields of education in order to eliminate stereotyped ideas on the role of men and women. The revision of the Fundamental Law of Education is now under consideration and the new bill proposed by the government committee does not specify the need of coeducation. Japanese government should further promote "coeducation" with the aim and the intent of the Convention in mind.

Possible questions regarding Article 10
1. How is the gender equality education taught in schools?
Are there enough efforts made to ensure understanding for family diversity such as single parenthood and spouses with different surnames.
2. What is the government stand on gender-segregated education in the public high schools?

Article 11 The Elimination of Discrimination in Employment
1. [Indirect Discrimination] Regarding indirect discrimination, the government said that a social consensus on its definition has not been formulated yet and a forum for deliberation would be established in the fiscal year 2002. However, the standard definition of indirect discrimination has been established internationally and Concluding Comments of the CEDAW on Japanese reports also pointed out the issue in 1995. The government should formulate a law or guideline on this matter immediately.
2. [Part-time Work] Since the enactment of the Law Concerning the Improvement of Employment Management, Etc. of Part-Time Workers (here under Part-Time Work Law) in 1993, the wage gap between part-time workers and full-time workers has been expanding. Fixed-term employment has also increased. In other words, the law has not been effective in improving working conditions of part-time workers. While the government considered revising the Part-Time Work Law, the study group of the Health, Labor and Welfare Ministry only proposed a set of guidelines on the "Japanese-Style Rules of Equal Treatment" (July 2002) which admitted different treatment according to whether overtime work and transfer at the request of employer, among others, had binding effect over an employee, and did not propose a legislation for de facto equal treatment. The government should formulate a law for equal treatment between part-time workers and full-time workers including restrictions on fixed-term employment.

Possible Questions regarding Article 11
(1) How is the sex discrimination in the workplace treated in courts? Give some examples of leading cases regarding promotion and wage discriminations.
(2) How is the "indirect discrimination" handled in courts?
Doesn't the Japanese government believe that the consensus for "indirect discrimination" have been achieved in international arena?

Article 12 Elimination of Discrimination in Health Care
1. Among the teenage population, an upward trend has been observed in the rate of artificial abortion, in the rate of HIV and sexually transmitted diseases. The Government should provide practical sex education at school, including how to appropriately use a condom (both male and female condoms), in order to prevent undesired pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases, future infertility, and other problems, in the teenage population. In addition, it is necessary to conduct programs to provide information and promote awareness of reproductive health and rights for adults in social and life-long education.
Article 13 Elimination of Discrimination in Economic and Social Activities
1. [Social Security and Taxation System] There is no reference in the government
report about reforming the current social security and tax system which reward "wives as a dependent of the household", discouraging female to be economically independent. The government is currently examining the issue on pension, however, it is imperative that the government revamp the whole system taking into consideration the similar problem which arise from health insurance and long term care insurance so that these social securities system does not reinforce the gendered roles.
Although the Japanese system imposes tax on income of each individuals, tax
deduction is given to each household unit as a special deduction to those whose spouse have only a limited amount or no income. These deductions that give special consideration for wives (reinforcing the gendered role) must be reconsidered.

Possible questions for Articles 5 and 13
1. How is the current taxation and pension system influencing the behavior of the spouse, who is economically dependent on the head of the household, when choosing a career?
2. What measures have been taken by the government to redress the persistent prejudice and practices of gendered roles in the household?

Article 14 Elimination of Discrimination against Rural Women
1. The Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, and Fisheries advocates concluding family business agreements and establishing corporations in family farm management to formally recognize the economic contribution of women in the family. However, issue of wages and salaries which is closely related to a taxation system may not be solved solely among family members but requires a legislative action. Therefore, it is necessary for the government to consider both reforming the taxation system and legislating a family-based joint management.
Article 16 Elimination of Discrimination Relating to Marriage and Family Relations
1. Although the issues requiring revision of the Civil Code, including minimum age for marriage (Article 731 of the Civil Code), waiting period required for women to remarry after divorce (Article 733), and surnames of married couples (Article 750), have been stated in every periodic report since the first consideration of Japanese report by the CEDAW, none have been solved yet. Therefore, an analysis of this prolonged situation is necessary. Also, now that the issue of family law reform has become a political issue, issues such as the minimum age for marriage and waiting period required for women to remarry should be considered separately from the issue of surnames of married couples, as the former requires redressing de jure inequality and the latter is necessary to obtain de facto equality.
Although adoption of "exceptional separate-surname system" which allows a couple to use separate surnames only as an exception is currently under discussion among policy makers, public opinion and actual practice are increasingly moving toward supporting "equality". Therefore, statistical data including past survey results should be added to the statistical annex in relation to Article 16 in order to explicitly show the fact that the "optional separate-surname system" (permitting husband and wife to choose to have different surname on a regular basis) is now supported by the majority of the people.
2. [Domestic Violence] It can be commended that Law for the Prevention of Spousal Violence and the Protection of Victims and the Child Abuse Prevention Law were enacted and that a significant improvement has been seen in handlings of domestic violence cases since the submission of the fourth periodic report of Japan. It is provided in these laws that they are to be revised in about three (3) years after the enforcement. The points that should be included in revision of Spousal Violence Law are: 1) reinforcement of the emergency protection of victims and their children, 2) support for victims so that they can lead independent lives, and 3) measures targeted at batterers. The important points that should be revised regarding Child Abuse Prevention Law include: 1) reinforcement of the emergency protection of victims and 2) ensuring its practical effectiveness by, for example, suspension of parental authority.

Possible Questions regarding Article 16
(1) Issue regarding the surname of married couple has been pointed out since the first report reviewed in 1988. Majority of the population supports optional separate surnames but in reality, over 97% of the married couples choose surname of the husband. This is a situation that runs contrary to the Convention. What is the outlook on the revision of family law?
(2) Has there been enough necessary action taken to effectively implement the new Law on Domestic Violence?


ページトップへ

Copyright (C) 2002 Japanese Association of International Women's Rights. All Rights Reserved.