Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2012, published 102nd ILC session (2013)

Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29) - Japan (Ratification: 1932)

For a number of years, the Committee has been examining the issues of wartime industrial forced labour and sexual slavery (so-called “comfort women”) during the Second World War. It has referred in this regard to its earlier considerations and conclusions concerning the limits of its mandate in respect of these historical breaches of the Convention. On numerous occasions, the Committee expressed the hope that, in making further efforts to seek reconciliation with the victims, the Government would take measures to respond to the claims of the aged surviving victims. The Government was requested to continue to provide information about any developments in this regard.

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its reports received on 5 September and 1 October 2012, as well as in the Government’s communications received on 28 February and 14 and 16 November 2011.

The Committee notes communications received in 2011 and 2012 from the following workers’ organizations:

• -All-Japan Shipbuilding & Engineering Union (AJSEU) (dated 24 and 28 August 2011 and 17 August 2012);
• -Federation of Korean Trade Unions (FKTU) and Korean Confederation of Trade Unions (KCTU) (dated 27 August and 5 October 2011 and 28 August 2012);
• -National Confederation of Trade Unions (ZENROREN) (dated 21 September 2012).

Copies of the above communications from workers’ organizations were forwarded to the Government for any comments it might wish to make on the matters raised therein. The Committee notes the Government’s response to most of these communications received on 5 September and 14 November 2012.

The Committee notes that, in the above communications, the workers’ organizations express concern about the position of the Government with regard to the issue of “comfort women” and call on the Government to take urgent measures to resolve the issue. Some of the above communications deny the role of the Asian Women’s Fund (AWF) in restoring the victims’ dignity, since the surviving victims largely rejected the compensation offered by the Fund and expressed their opposition to its activities. Some of the workers’ organizations also express their scepticism about the follow-up activities of the AWF being implemented by the Government. They also call on the Government to review national laws with a view to removing existing obstacles to obtaining full reparations before Japanese courts and to settle the wartime forced labour issue.

Some of the above communications refer to a decision of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Korea passed on 30 August 2011 on the constitutional appeal filed by 109 surviving victims of military sexual slavery, in which the Constitutional Court urged the Korean Government to take proactive action to restore the violated human rights of the victims. In compliance with this decision, the Korean Government proposed bilateral talks to settle the issue with the Government of Japan. Following the above ruling of the Constitutional Court, the Korean Supreme Court ordered the lower courts of the Republic of Korea to retry two cases of wartime industrial forced labour on 24 May 2012.

The communications from the workers’ organizations continue to refer to the issue of military sexual slavery as it had been taken up by the United Nations bodies, in particular, in the report of the Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences, submitted to the United Nations Human Rights Council on 23 April 2010 (A/HRC/14/22). Some of the above communications also referred to resolutions adopted by the local councils of Japan and the Republic of Korea. Thus, since March 2008 and up to August 2012, 36 Japanese city councils and 54 Korean city councils adopted resolutions urging the Government to solve the Japanese military sexual slavery issue, to restore dignity and justice to the victims, to provide them with compensation, and to further educate the public.

The Committee has taken due note of the Government’s repeated statement in its reports that it remains committed to the position expressed in the August 1993 statement of the then Chief Cabinet Secretary, Mr Yohei Kono, where he expressed sincere apologies and remorse to the former “comfort women”, while recognizing that this issue was, with the involvement of the military authorities of the day, a grave affront to the honour and dignity of a large number of women. The Government reiterates that this statement embodies its official position on this matter which remains unchanged. It recalls that the Government of Japan has since expressed its sincere apologies and remorse on many occasions, based on the then Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama’s statement in August 1995. The Government also refers once again to a letter expressing apologies and remorse, which was sent by the Prime Minister, on behalf of the Government of Japan, directly to each former “comfort woman”, in connection with the activities of the AWF.

As regards the non-legal measures to respond to the claims of the surviving victims of wartime military sexual slavery and to meet their expectations, the Government refers once again to the activities of the AWF, which was established in 1995 in order to extend atonement from the Government and people of Japan to the former “comfort women” and was dissolved in 2007, after it had completed its objectives. The Committee has noted the Government’s indication that it provided all possible assistance for the AWF, including bearing its total operational costs, fully supporting its fund-raising activities and providing the necessary funds to implement its activities. In this regard, the Government once again indicates that it contributed approximately US$60 million from the national budget and Japanese people donated approximately US$7 million to the AWF. However, the Committee recalls that it has considered in its earlier observations that the rejection by the majority of former “comfort women” of monies from the AWF, because it was not seen as compensation from the Government, suggested that this measure had not met the expectations of the majority of the victims. The Committee therefore expressed the hope that the Government would make efforts, in consultation with the surviving victims and the organizations which represent them, to find an alternative way to compensate the victims in a manner that would meet their expectations.

The Committee notes that the Government repeats its previous statement that it will continue to implement follow-up activities of the AWF. The Government reiterates that, as part of such follow-up, the Government of Japan has entrusted the people who were involved in the AWF to implement visiting care activity and group counselling activity (Republic of Korea and the Philippines), as well as exchange of opinions with government officials and academia (Indonesia and the Philippines). The Committee also notes from the Government’s report, and from a communication received in February 2011, that Mr Yutaka Banno, then State Secretary for Foreign Affairs, and Ms Makiko Kikuta, then Parliamentary Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs, met with former “comfort women” in November 2010 and January 2011 in Japan and explained in person the Government’s views and listened to their current living circumstances, past experiences, wishes and personal feelings. The Government also indicates that, in the light of the meetings, it has increased the budget of the visiting care activities and group counselling activities and will continue to implement follow-up activities of the AWF, while continuing its efforts to grasp the needs of former “comfort women”.

Finally, the Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that, during the period from 1 June 2010 to 31 May 2012, the courts “pronounced” on five cases regarding “conscripted forced labourers” with regard to lawsuits in which the plaintiffs claimed state compensation for damages. The Government indicates that, in all these cases, the plaintiffs’ claims for compensation against the Government of Japan have been dismissed by reason that all these cases do not fall under the reasons of final appeals of the Code of Civil Procedure. There were no court decisions regarding the “comfort women” issue. The Government also indicates that, as of 31 May 2012, there were no cases pending in the Japanese courts concerning the “comfort women” and “conscripted forced labourers” issues.

While observing that representatives of the Government met with the “comfort women” in 2010 and 2011, the Committee notes with concern that no concrete outcome has been noted. The Committee expresses the firm hope that, given the seriousness and long-standing nature of the case, the Government will continue to make further efforts to achieve reconciliation with the victims, and that measures will be taken, without further delay, to respond to the claims being made by the aged surviving victims of wartime industrial forced labour and military sexual slavery. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the implementation of the follow-up activities of the AWF referred to above and on any other measures taken or envisaged, including any follow-up to the meetings with former “comfort women” referred to above.

Articles 1(1), 2(1) and 25 of the Convention. Industrial Training and Technical Internship Programme. Referring to its earlier comments, the Committee notes the communications received from the Labour Union of Migrant Workers dated 22 August 2011 and 29 August 2012, which contain information concerning the implementation of the revised Industrial Training and Technical Internship Programme (“Foreign Trainee” Programme), as well as the Government’s response to these communications received on 1 October and 14 November 2012.

The Committee previously noted that the abovementioned programme was established in order to develop the human and industrial resources of developing countries, with the aim of securing the transfer of industrial technology, skills and knowledge. Under this programme, foreign nationals can enter Japan as “trainees” for one year and become “technical interns” for another two years; they are required to go back to their country thereafter. The programme has been monitored by the Japan International Training Cooperation Organization (JITCO), under the supervision of the government organizations concerned, including the Immigration Bureau and labour standards inspection bodies. The Committee also noted that the Training and Technical Internship Programme was revised in July 2010 with a view to strengthening the protection of trainees and technical interns, who had been given a status of residence of “Technical Intern Training” for a maximum period of three years and acquired protection under labour laws and regulations, such as the Labour Standards Law and the Minimum Wage Law, while engaging in skill-building activities under their employment contract. In addition, collection of guarantee money and penalty charges by dispatching organizations and accepting organizations and companies was prohibited, and the suspension period during which organizations found guilty of human rights abuses were not allowed to accept technical interns was extended from three years to five years.

However, according to the allegations contained in the above communications from the Labour Union of Migrant Workers, the conditions of foreign trainees have not improved: they are still forced to work under the menace of deportation, they are not allowed to change their employer and remain vulnerable to employers’ abuses (illegal overtime, violation of industrial safety and health rules, confiscation of trainees’ and interns’ passports by employers, etc.). The Union refers to the statistical information from the JITCO website concerning the death of the foreign trainees and technical interns as a result of work-related accidents and diseases in 2011. It also refers to the information concerning various labour law violations published in reports of some Prefectural Labour Bureaus (of Gifu, Fukui, Aichi and Shimane) related to the Technical Internship Programme. The Union considers that the problems cannot be resolved by superficial change of wording and the programme should be abolished.

In its response to the above communications, the Government reiterates that the Training and Technical Internship Programme explicitly prohibits forced or compulsory labour. The Immigration Bureau and JITCO have been supervising the programme in order to prevent any inappropriate cases from occurring. Moreover, no cases that might fall under the category of forced labour have been recognized in the course of the operation of the programme. In addition, labour standards inspection bodies have been actively implementing supervisory guidance for business operators that employ technical interns and strict actions have been taken when violations of section 5 of the Labour Standards Law (prohibition of the exaction of forced or compulsory labour by employers by means of physical violence, intimidation, confinement or any other unfair restraint on the mental or physical freedom of workers) were observed. As regards, more specifically, cases of serious human rights violations involving inappropriate behaviour toward interns, including violence and taking away passports, etc., the Immigration Bureau has been recognizing “misconduct” of accepting organizations after making the necessary examinations and strictly responding by prohibiting such organizations from accepting trainees/interns for up to five years. The Government indicates that “misconduct” of accepting organizations was recognized for 163 organizations in 2010 and 184 organizations in 2011, including the organizations that failed to pay overtime premium to interns and made them work long overtime hours considerably exceeding the limits stipulated in the labour agreement. Regarding the activities of the labour standard inspection offices in securing appropriate working conditions for technical interns, the Government indicates that, out of 2,748 cases of supervisory guidance provided to implementing organizations in 2011, violations of labour laws and regulations were acknowledged in 2,252 cases, and 23 cases of serious or vicious violations with regard to technical interns have been sent to the public prosecutors’ offices. JITCO has continued to conduct numerous visiting consultations to accepting organizations and companies and has established telephone consultation hotlines in certain native languages. The Government indicates, however, that statistics on the numbers of cases of prosecutions and convictions concerning violations with regard to technical interns are not available.

While noting this information, the Committee asks the Government to continue to provide information on the various measures taken, both in legislation and in practice, with a view to strengthening the protection of foreign technical interns. Please provide information, in particular, on the measures taken to strengthen the system of supervision against violations through appropriate inspections and monitoring. The Committee also hopes that, in its next report, the Government will be in a position to supply statistics on the numbers of cases of prosecutions and convictions, indicating also the penalties imposed on perpetrators.

Trafficking in persons. The Committee notes with interest the information on various measures taken by the Government under the 2009 Action Plan to combat trafficking in persons provided in its report received on 1 October 2012. It notes, in particular, the Government’s indications concerning measures taken in the areas of prevention of trafficking in persons (such as the reinforcement of immigration control measures and measures to raise public awareness), protection of victims (including the functioning of the Women’s Consulting Offices, improvement in the status of residence of the victims and assistance for the victims’ repatriation), prosecution of offenders (including statistics showing the numbers of persons arrested, prosecuted and sentenced for trafficking-related crimes) and cooperation with foreign governments and international organizations.

The Committee also notes the comments received from the Japanese Trade Union Confederation (JTUC–RENGO) concerning anti-trafficking measures, communicated by the Government with its report, in which JTUC–RENGO reiterates its view expressed in its earlier communication that victim protection measures should be reinforced and calls again for the implementation of a multifaceted support system encompassing a broad range of measures in accordance with the 2008 recommendations of the United Nations Human Rights Committee. JTUC–RENGO also calls for the strengthening of countermeasures against fraudulent marriages arranged for the purpose of obtaining working visas in Japan, which can result in the imposition of forced labour conditions by the fake marriage brokers. As regards, more particularly, such countermeasures, the Government indicates in its report that the immigration authorities conduct a stricter residence examination and cooperate with the police in order to identify trafficking in persons cases and to protect the victims in accordance with the 2009 Action Plan to combat trafficking in persons.

The Committee reiterates its hope that the Government will continue to provide, in its future reports, information concerning the implementation of various measures provided for in the 2009 Anti-Trafficking Action Plan, including, in particular, information on the application of criminal sanctions to the perpetrators and available statistics.