NGO Report in Response to the First and Second Report Prepared by the Government of Japan Concerning the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (Buraku Issue)
Director, Buraku Liberation and Human Rights Research Institute
Kenzo Tomonaga
In December 1999, the Japanese Government submitted to the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination the First and Second Report concerning the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. However, the report dose not refer to the Buraku issue at all. In coordination with the International Movement Against All Forms of Discrimination and Racism - Japan Committee, BLHRRI made an NGO report prior to the consideration of the report of Japanese Government in March 2001. We serially carry the NGO report in the Buraku Liberation News. The following is the first part of the series.
1. Article 1 (Definition of Racial Discrimination)
(1) Paragraph 1: While the Government Report does not refer to Buraku discrimination, the Buraku discrimination issue should be covered by the Convention on the grounds as are described in the attached Data 1-1.
(2) Paragraph 2.
(3) Paragraph 3.
(4) Paragraph 4. (To be discussed in connection with Paragraph 2 of Article 2)
2. Article 2 (Undertakings of State Parties to Eliminate Discrimination)
(1) With regard to Paragraph 1 (a), Toyama city authorities in Toyama Prefecture have ignored a problem that arose from the reorganization of city town blocks. In reorganizing the town blocks, two town block assemblies that adjoined a Buraku community refused to be integrated into the same town block assembly as the Buraku community. As a result, the Buraku community has been forced to use a town block name that does not officially exist. The city authorities are urged to take immediate steps to resolve this problem. (Data 2)
Paragraph 1 (b).
Paragraph 1 (c).
With regard to Paragraph 1 (d), there have been several cases of discrimination in which those who practice discrimination against Buraku people do not stop doing so even though warnings are repeatedly given to them by the concerned parties. With regard to the case in Kishiwada City in Osaka Prefecture, as described in Data 3-1 & 3-2, the National Government, Osaka Prefectural Government and Kishiwada City Government should persuade the person involved to stop acting in a discriminatory manner and introduce legal measures to prohibit such practices.
Data 1-1
I. Article 1 - Buraku Discrimination
Within the Scope of Application of the Convention
1. Buraku discrimination had long existed in Japan. To use an expression of the Government, the elimination of Buraku discrimination is a challenge for the entire nation. When the Government of Japan acceded the Convention it would not admit that the Convention was applicable to Buraku discrimination. Furthermore, the Government Report did not include any statements concerning Buraku discrimination. Based on our position that the application of the Convention is legitimate, we urge the government to accept the application of the Convention with regard to Buraku discrimination. We believe that our position on the Convention is compatible with the observations and recommendations the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination has made.
2. Proposals that were made by the Cabinet Dowa Policy Council in 1965 stated, "The so-called Dowa problem is a most serious and important social problem for Japan because of the fact that a segment of the people of Japan, owing to discrimination based on a class system that was formed in the process of the historical development of Japanese society, is placed in such an inferior position economically, socially and culturally that their fundamental human rights are grossly violated even in present day society and that, in particular, their civil rights and liberties, which are ensured to all people as a principle of modern society, are not fully guaranteed in reality."
Since the Law on Special Measures for Dowa Projects was enacted in July 1969, a series of special laws have been implemented that have resulted in solving the Dowa issue to some extent. It does, however, remain unresolved and is still a serious social problem for Japan. This fact is confirmed by the comments and proposals that were made by the Consultative Council for Regional Improvement Measures in 1996 with the following statement; "The Dowa issue, as a specific human rights problem in our society, is the most serious and grave problem that violates the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution of Japan. It has been more than a quarter of a century since the measures to address the Dowa problem were fully implemented. While, owing to the efforts of many people, we have been moving towards a solution of the Dowa problem, we have to admit with regret that, even today, it is still a very important issue in Japan. In such a context, the genuineness of the postwar democracy of Japan is in question. As a responsible member of the international community, Japan has to fulfill its international responsibilities by solving its various human rights problems, including the Dowa problem, as early as possible."
3. As explained above, there is no doubt that Buraku discrimination is one of the most serious human rights problems that Japan still faces. While Buraku discrimination is not racial discrimination in the general sense, we believe that it constitutes discrimination based on "descent", as provided in Paragraph 1 of Article 1 of the Convention. This reminds us of the concluding observations that the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination adopted after consideration of the Periodic Report that was submitted by the Government of India. In the observations, the Committee noted that the caste system is one of the factors that impedes the full implementation of the Convention (A/51/18, para. 342). It also stated that the term "descent", mentioned in Article 1 of the Convention, does not solely refer to race, and affirms that the situation of the scheduled castes and scheduled tribes falls within the scope of the Convention (Ibid., para. 352).
We welcome and support the above interpretation of the Committee as it will help to promote remedial measures for various groups who suffer from discrimination in different parts of the world in accordance with the Convention. As mentioned above, the caste system of India and Buraku discrimination in Japan are of basically the same nature. In considering the observations that the Committee made on the report from India, we conclude that the application of the Convention to Buraku discrimination is due.
In addition to this, various steps that can be taken in order to eliminate racial discrimination are stipulated in the Convention. Specifically, we believe that prohibition of discrimination in the private sector (para. 1-(d) of Article 2), special measures for vulnerable groups (para. 2 of Article 2), prohibition of incitement to discrimination (para. (a) and (b) of Article 4), effective remedies against acts of discrimination (Article 6), and effective measures to promote awareness-raising (Article 7) are all effective and useful for solving the problem of Buraku discrimination. The Convention holds the key role in our efforts to put an end to Buraku discrimination. This also supports the fact that the Convention is closely related to the Buraku issue.
4. On August 11, 2000, the UN Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights adopted a resolution concerning discrimination based on work and descent. The resolution indicated that discrimination based on the caste system in South Asia, Buraku discrimination in Japan, and similar discrimination in Africa are all identified as forms of discrimination that are prohibited by international human rights law, and it urges governments to take legislative and administrative measures to eliminate discrimination and to exercise appropriate legal penalties and sanctions to individuals or entities who have engaged in discriminatory practices. (Data 1-2)
5. On the basis of the above, we request the Government of Japan:
1) To accept application of the Convention to Buraku discrimination.
2) To make further efforts towards the elimination of Buraku discrimination in accordance with provisions and the objectives of the Convention.
<Reference> Brief Outlines of the Buraku Issue
1) Proposals made by the Cabinet Dowa Policy Council in 1965 stated, "The so-called Dowa problem is a most serious and important social problem for Japan because of the fact that a segment of the people of Japan, owing to discrimination based on a class system that was formed in the process of the historical development of Japanese society, is placed in such an inferior position economically, socially and culturally that their fundamental human rights are grossly violated even in present day society and that, in particular, their civil rights and liberties, which are ensured to all people as a principle of modern society, are not fully guaranteed in reality."
2) Since the Law on Special Measures for Dowa Projects was enacted in July 1969, a series of special laws have been implemented that have resulted in solving the Dowa issue to some extent. It does, however, as yet remain unresolved and is still a serious social problem for Japan. This fact is confirmed by the comments and proposals that were made by the Consultative Council for Regional Improvement Measures in 1996 with the following statement; "The Dowa issue, as a specific human rights problem in our society, is the most serious and grave problem violating the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Japanese Constitution. It has been more than quarter of a century since measures addressing the Dowa problem were fully implemented. While the Dowa problem has been moving towards a solution, owing to the efforts of many people, we have to admit with regret that it is still a very important issue in Japan today. In such a context, the genuineness of the postwar democracy of Japan is in question. As a responsible member of the international community, Japan has to fulfill its international responsibilities by solving the various human rights problems around the country, including the Dowa problem, as early as possible."
3) In the Council's comments and proposals, the reality of Buraku discrimination is illustrated more specifically. It states, "Outcomes of the survey indicate that the implementation of certain measures has contributed to the improvement of the living environment and physical infrastructure of Buraku communities, as well as narrowing some of the gaps that existed between Buraku people and mainstream Japanese. However, there are still gaps in some areas, such as education, as is attested by lower entrance rates into higher education, unstable employment due to insufficient educational background, and problems in industrial activities in Buraku communities. While discriminatory consciousness among non-Buraku people has been steadily dissolved, deep-rooted discrimination still remains in some areas, particularly in marriage. Human rights violations against Buraku people still occur and the Government's human rights protection service has not proven to be very effective in preventing these violations. The implementation of measures should therefore be fairly adjusted in accordance with the actual situation surrounding the Buraku issue."
4) Despite the fact that Buraku discrimination has had a serious negative impact on Buraku people, especially during the time of the prolonged depression, the Government has become less and less willing to approach a solution. The current Law on Special Measures will expire at the end of March, 2002. The Government has indicated its intention not to renew the law after its expiration. At the very least, there is a need to conduct a survey to assess the actual conditions of Buraku communities as soon as possible. It appears, to date, that the government has no intention to do so.
According to the 1993 Survey to Grasp the Actual Conditions of Dowa Areas made by the Policy Office of Regional Improvement of the Management and Coordination Agency, the number of areas that have been covered by the Regional Improvement Projects amount to 4,442 with a total number of 298,385 households and a total population of 892,751 Dowa people. These figures, however, only represent the households and populations of those Buraku communities that have been designated as Dowa areas by the Government. The above figures are therefore far exceeded by the actual numbers.
<Notes>
Dowa issue: An administrative term for the issue of discrimination against Buraku people
Dowa people: An administrative term for the people of Buraku origin
Dowa area: An administrative term for a Buraku community where Buraku people live
Regional Improvement Projects: An administrative term for the measures to improve the inferior living conditions of Buraku communities and Buraku people. (They are also called Improvement Projects for Dowa Areas)
Data1-2
Discrimination based on work and descent resolution by the UN Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights
(See Buraku Liberation News No.116)
Data 2
Town A/B in Toyama city is a Buraku community of 70 households with 280 people. Because of a national route running through in the middle of the town, it was supposed to divide into two town blocks of A and B under the administrative block division of the city government. However, residents of both town A and town B did not accept to integrate residents of the Buraku community into their town block. Thus, residents of the Buraku community have to identify their town block with a combined name "Town A/B", which does not actually exist under the administrative block division.
Data3-1
Posting of a Bill with Discriminatory Statements
- a Case in Kishiwada City, Osaka Prefecture:
1. Outlines:
In October 1993, Kishiwada City Hall was informed by some citizens that there was a bill with discriminatory statements on the wall nearby their house.
It was found that a house under reform work was posting a bill with a statement to slander a court judge using derogatory terms.
Officers of the city hall and management of the company where the man who posted the bill worked have tried to convince him not to do that. However, he has consistently refused the advice. The man has repeatedly made remarks such as, "Judges are all born as thefts or 'eta' (extreme filth referring to Buraku people)." "Thefts are born thefts, while 'eta' are born 'eta'".
The person who was slandered by the man on the bill took an action asking for a provisional injunction to remove the bill. In January 1998, the court ruled out to exercise the provisional injunction.
Nevertheless, the man again posted the bill, which was later removed under the court decision. Yet, the man posted it again. The bill has still been on the wall of his house.
2. Development:
Oct 28, 1993
Residents nearby found the bill on the windows
Since 1994
City office repeatedly advised him to stop discriminatory acts.
Jan. 13, 1997
Court decision was made on a provisional injunction. The bill was removed under the decision.
Jan. 18, 1997
The man posted it again.
Feb. 4, 1997
The bill was removed again under the court decision.
Feb. 5, 1997
The bill was posted for the third time.
3. Problems:
The bill has been posted on the wall of his house, a personal property. The man has no intention to take it off. Under the provisional injunction, the bill was taken off twice. Yet, he has never given up. It is really a malicious act. To date, no effective solution has been found, including legal means to remove the bill.
Data3-2
Discriminatory Place-cards
A man living in Kishiwada city, in Osaka prefecture, has been posting place-cards on the outside wall of his home that display discriminatory messages. He does this because he is unhappy with the judgment of a lawsuit that he lost. The card says, "I have been harassed by eta [extreme filth]". He uses derogatory terms such as 'eta' in order to attack other people who were involved in the lawsuit. Despite repeated attempts to convince him to stop, he has not yet done so.
(to be continued.)
|BACK|