Issue related to Article 20 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Request for enactment of a law to prevent hate speech against the Japanese people

- 1 -
The Japan Society for History Textbook (JSHT)
NGO in special consultative status with the Economic and Social Council since 2019.
Address: Suido 2-6-3 -203, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 112-0005 Japan
TEL: +81 3-6912-0047 FAX: +81 3-6912-0048

http://www.tsukurukai.com/e

CCPR-International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

136 Session (10 Oct 2022 – 04 Nov 2022)

Japan

NGO Report

11th May 2022

——————————————————————————————————–
Issue related to Article 20 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
Request for enactment of a law to prevent hate speech against the Japanese people

1. Relevant ICCPR Article and paragraph of the Government Report
(CCPR/C/JPN/7)
- Article 20-2
Any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement
to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.
- Government Report (CCPR/C/JPN/7)
Paragraph 16、20、22、27 and 28
2. Abstract
In 2016, “Act on the Promotion of Efforts to Eliminate Unfair Discriminatory
Speech and Behavior against Persons Originating from Outside Japan” was enacted
- 2 -
in Japan. The act aims to eliminate hate crimes, but it has a serious flaw because it
restricts the target for protection only to “persons originating from outside Japan.”
In this context, “persons originating from outside Japan” are considered minorities
and victims, while the Japanese as a majority are seen as perpetrators. Here, any
possibility for the Japanese (majority) to become victims of hate crimes is not at all
considered. However, hate crimes derive from prejudice and hatred toward
individuals or groups with certain characteristics, whether minority or majority.
There is no guarantee that minorities will never have prejudice or hatred toward the
majority. When it comes to hate crimes, they should not be seen solely as confrontation
between minorities and the majority.
It is necessary to correct the flaw ensconced in this act as soon as possible. We
strongly request the United Nations Human Rights Committee (CCPR) to
recommend that the Japanese Government correct the act in question.
3. Background and current situation of the issue
Hate crimes refer to criminal acts of harassment, threat, violence and others caused
by prejudice or hatred toward individuals or groups with certain characteristics
related to racial, ethnic or religious matters or sexual preferences. As a means to
cope legally with such hate crimes, the “Act on the Promotion of Efforts to Eliminate
Unfair Discriminatory Speech and Behavior against Persons Originating from
Outside Japan” (hereinafter, Hate Speech Elimination Act) was enacted in 2016 in
Japan.
However, this Hate Speech Elimination Act has a serious flaw. That is, the Act
applies only to persons originating from outside Japan, which means that those who
are not “persons originating from outside Japan,” namely, the Japanese people, are
not at all protected against hate crimes. Any hate crime against Japanese is neither
prohibited by law nor punished legally. Due to this flaw, when hate crimes are
committed against Japanese, there are no legal consequences. In other words,
perpetrators of hate crimes against Japanese are given a free hand.
In the justification for enactment of this flawed law lies the preconception that there
is conflict between those originating from outside Japan, who are minorities and
victims, and the Japanese who are the majority and perpetrators. Owing to this
premise, any possibility for the Japanese majority to fall prey to hate crimes is not
- 3 -
at all taken into consideration.
However, hate crimes are committed out of prejudice and hatred against individuals
or groups with certain characteristics. No one can say for certain that minorities
never embrace prejudice or hatred against the majority. Naturally, the majority
(Japanese) are very likely to become victims of hate crimes. The very idea that
“persons originating from outside Japan” (regarded as minorities) are the only ones
that need to be protected is based on prejudice. In the first place, it is wrong to put
the issue in the perspective of minorities versus the majority when dealing with hate
crimes.
Article 20-2 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights states: “Any
advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to
discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.” In this article, there
is no distinction between minorities and the majority. On the other hand, Japan’s
Hate Speech Elimination Act strictly limits the legal protection from hate speech to
“persons originating from outside Japan.” This clearly breaches the ICCPR Article
20-2.
To remedy this flaw, supplementary resolutions had been adopted:
[Supplementary resolution by the House of Representatives]
In the light of this Act’s principle, the Japanese Constitution and the Internal
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination and on the
basis of fundamental understanding that it is wrong to assume any unfair
discriminatory speech or behavior is permissible so long as it is committed against
those other than “persons originating from outside Japan” as stated in the Act, the
Act should be properly implemented.
[Supplementary resolution by the House of Councilors]
It is wrong to regard any unfair discriminatory speech or behavior as permissible so
long as it is other than “unfair, discriminatory speech or behavior against persons
originating from outside Japan, as stated in the Article 2 of the Act. In the light of
this Act, the Japanese Constitution and the International Convention of the
Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, the Act should be properly
implemented.
- 4 -
These supplementary resolutions by both Houses of the Japanese Diet are
extremely ambiguous. Why is it not simply stated that the protection provided by
the Hate Speech Elimination Act is provided to all people?
Moreover, people generally do not know that there are such supplementary
resolutions attached to the Hate Speech Elimination Act. So, it is not clear to what
extent these resolutions are respected and taken account of by the courts. Being
“supplementary”, there is a high probability that the resolutions could be regarded
as insignificant and remain mere reference or in the worst case may be completely
ignored.
The issue cannot be solved by supplementary resolutions, it should be clearly stated
in the Hate Speech Elimination Act that the Act protects “all people.” In concrete
terms, the words “persons originating from outside Japan” should be deleted and
replaced with the words “all people”, instead.
4. Conclusion
(1) We request that the Japanese Government:
Crack down on hate crimes against Japanese people and enact a law to strictly
punish perpetrators. Specifically, change the phrase “persons originating from
outside Japan” to “all persons” and some others, if necessary, to make the law
consistent.
(2) We request that the Human Rights Committee (ICCPR):
Recommend the Japanese Government to completely rewrite the phrase “persons
originating from outside Japan” to cover all persons for protection from hate crimes
in the Hate Speech Elimination Act.
END