Racist Rightwing Nationalist Mayor Of Osaka Hashimoto Opposes Comfort Women Memorial

Racist Rightwing Nationalist Mayor Of Osaka Hashimoto Joins Japan Abe Government In Opposing SF Memorial For Comfort Women
Osaka Mayor, Defender of "Comfort Women," Asks SF Board to Retract Condemnation
Controversial remarks over wartime sex slavery sparked outrage.
http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Comfort-Women-Defending-Osaka-Mayor-Asks-SF-Board-To-Retract-Condemnation-220737651.html
By Chris Roberts

A memorial dedicated to the Comfort Women, sex slaves kept by Japanese soldiers in World War II. The mayor of Osaka, who in May defended the practice, is asking San Francisco city leaders to withdraw a condemnation of his remarks.
The comfort mayor is fighting back -- and one of his first targets is San Francisco.
Embattled Osaka Mayor Toru Hashimoto -- whose comments defending the Japanese army's wartime practice of using "comfort women," essentially sex slaves, in military brothels, sparked international outcry -- is asking the San Francisco Board of Supervisors to retract its resolution condemning his remarks, according to Kyodo News International.
Hashimoto, a onetime favorite for prime minister and co-leader of the Japan Restoration Party, said in May that the military brothels were "necessary" during wartime for Japanese soldiers.
He added that modern-day American soldiers on Okinawa should use more adult entertainment services in order to cut down on sexual assault and other violence towards women on that island, according to the New York Times.
San Francisco political leaders participated in the outrage against Hashimoto. Led by Supervisor Jane Kim -- who is of Korean descent; many of the women serving as sex slaves in Japanese brothels during the war were Korean -- the Board of Supervisors passed a resolution on June 18 blasting Hashimoto's remarks.
Hashimoto subsequently canceled a visit to San Francisco -- but he said Thursday that he sent a letter to San Francisco leaders asking that the resolution be retracted.

According to the Global Post, Hashimoto said that "misunderstandings" led to the resolution, and that he has "never legitimized or defended the institution of 'comfort women.'"
"My statements on 'comfort women' have always been consistent with my concern for the protection and enhancement of women's dignity and human rights," he said in the letter, adding that further blaming of Japan for the ugly practice would hurt international relations.
No response from San Francisco city officials was immediately available.
Published at 4:01 PM PDT on Aug 22, 2013

Japan mayor Toru Hashimoto: Wartime prostitution was necessary
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=6_LMk8jmd2s
Japan mayor: Wartime prostitution was necessary
Published on May 14, 2013
A leading Japanese politician has called the use of sex slaves by Japanese soldiers during world war two a "necessary system".
Toru Hashimoto, the Osaka mayor, made the reference to about 200,000 women, mostly Korean and Chinese, who were believed to have been coerced into becoming so-called comfort women.
His comments have provoked reactions from others in Japan, and the region.
Al Jazeera's Harry Fawcett reports from Seoul.

San Francisco spurned Hashimoto amid sex slave outrage
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2013/06/12/national/san-francisco-spurned-hashimoto-amid-sex-slave-outrage/#.UbgIQ46hDzI
BY ERIC JOHNSTON
STAFF WRITER

• JUN 12, 2013


OSAKA – A senior official in San Francisco sent a personal message to Osaka in late May urging that Osaka Mayor Toru Hashimoto, co-leader of Nippon Ishin no Kai (Japan Restoration Party), cancel his trip to the city due to local anger over his remarks that Japan’s wartime “comfort women” system was necessary at the time.

In a translation of the message sent to Osaka on May 22 but only released by the city Monday, the unnamed official said that, while it could not prevent a personal trip by Hashimoto, San Francisco would not treat it as an official visit and San Francisco Mayor Edwin Lee would not be hosting any reception for Hashimoto.

“The people of San Francisco do not, at present, welcome Hashimoto’s trip to the U.S.,” the message said.

Warning there would be demonstrations against Hashimoto, the official was quoted by Osaka as saying reactions in San Francisco over Hashimoto’s comments had been strong and his visit would damage Osaka’s image.

“Mayor Lee has been overwhelmed with protests from the Japanese-American community, as well as other ethnic and women’s groups. Hashimoto would be surrounded by protestors at every place he visits,” the official reportedly said.

This would force a reluctant San Francisco to spend a lot of tax money on beefed-up security measures for Hashimoto during the course of his trip, the official added.

Hashimoto had also been scheduled to travel to New York to meet with Mayor Michael Bloomberg. But the San Francisco official told Osaka that was not going to happen.

“Mayor Lee and Mayor Bloomberg are close, and Bloomberg can’t think about meeting Hashimoto now,” the San Francisco official said, urging that Hashimoto scrub his U.S. trip.

Osaka received the message at a time when Hashimoto was still insisting he would go ahead with the trip, which was to have taken place this week.

Following Hashimoto’s comments on May 13 that Japan’s wartime comfort women system had been necessary and that U.S. service members in Okinawa should make more use of sex establishments, the San Francisco mayor’s office told The Japan Times that Lee had been disappointed and offended by Hashimoto’s remarks, and that a meeting between the two had not been confirmed.

On May 28, Hashimoto formally canceled his trip, saying he did not want to cause any difficulties.

However, Osaka Gov. and Nippon Ishin Secretary-General Ichiro Matsui departed Monday for visits to San Francisco and New York. Osaka Prefecture and California have a formal relationship, and during the course of his visit Matsui plans to call on California Gov. Jerry Brown, prefectural officials said.

Matsui has backed Hashimoto on the controversial remarks, also saying the comfort women system was necessary at the time. Comfort women is the Japanese euphemism for the girls and women rounded up to serve as sex slaves in brothels serving the Imperial Japanese forces.

Women’s Blood Boiling!—400 People Gather to Protest against Hashimoto
http://labornetjp.blogspot.com/2013/06/womens-blood-boiling400-people-gather.html

<0522-01.jpeg>
The hall in the upper house was filled with people, later flooding out to the hallway. People were standing in the back, and those who could not enter the hall listened to presentations in the hallway. The protest action against Hashimoto’s comment on May 22 had about 400 angry people, more than 90 percent of whom were women. “We cann’t ever forgive him,” “He should resign right now,” “Hashimoto and Abe are the same” etc etc… anger never stopped. Some 235 groups raised their voice against Hashimoto’s repeated comments such as “comfort women were necessary” and “the US military should make good use of sex industry to relieve Marine’s sexual energy.” There were media organizations covering this event from Hong Kong and South Korea besides domestic media. Labornet TV live-streamed the event from 2 p.m. to 5 p.m.

女たちの怒り沸騰！～「橋下発言に抗議する緊急院内集会」に400人
参 院議員会館講堂が埋まった！あふれた！ 会場は立ち見になり、入場できない人たちが会館の外にも並んだ。5月22日午後3時から開催された「女性の人権を尊重する政治を！橋下発言に抗議する緊急 院内集会」には、約400人が詰めかけた。9割以上が女性。「絶対許せない」「すぐにヤメロ」「橋下と安倍は一緒」、怒りの声は止まらない。戦時中は「慰 安婦制度が必要なのは誰だってわかる」「海兵隊の性的エネルギーを解消するためにもっと風俗業を活用するよう進言した」など、たびかさなる橋下の暴言に、 235団体が抗議の声をあげた。メディアも国内だけでなく、香港・韓国からも取材が入った。レイバーネットTVでは、午後2時半～午後5時まで、熱気にあ ふれた集会の模様を生中継した。

Japan Osaka Mayor Hashimoto’s remarks ‘shameful’: South Korean foreign minister
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2013/05/28/national/hashimotos-remarks-shameful-south-korean-foreign-minister/#.UaQmTI6hDzI
Hashimoto’s remarks ‘shameful’: South Korean foreign minister
KYODO

• MAY 28, 2013
SEOUL – South Korean Foreign Minister Yun Byung-se on Monday rapped Osaka Mayor Toru Hashimoto’s latest remarks on the Imperial Japanese military’s wartime brothels as “embarrassing and shameful.”

“By making such remarks, Japan will be further isolated in the international community,” Yun said at a news conference.

Yun made the comment after he was asked to respond to Hashimoto’s suggestion earlier Monday at a press conference in Tokyo that the so-called “comfort women” issue be settled in the International Court of Justice.

“Many see such remarks as being far below common sense, embarrassing and shameful. If he made such remarks at the U.N. General Assembly or the U.S. Congress, that would cause serious damage to Japan’s many conscientious people,” Yun said.

Hashimoto recently sparked public outrage in South Korea and elsewhere by saying the comfort women system, which forced tens of thousands of Korean and other women into sexual servitude during the war, was necessary to maintain the discipline of the Japanese military.

However, Yun also stressed the importance of deepening cooperation with Japan economically culturally to stabilize bilateral ties that have been strained by historical issues related to Japan’s 1910-1945 brutal colonial rule of the Korean Peninsula.

“Despite these difficulties in issues of the past history, South Korea shares with Japan the values of democracy and market economy and also strategic interests over issues like North Korea,” he said.

Yun said Seoul will remain in close contact with Tokyo on North Korea-related issues while dealing “resolutely” with issues related to history.

In a related development, four South Korean female lawmakers departed for Japan on Monday to protest rightwing politicians’ suggestions that the Japanese military was justified in using the comfort women system during the war, Yonhap News Agency reported.

“These reckless remarks on sex slaves recur because the Japanese government has not fundamentally repented for its colonial rule over Korea,” You Seung-hee, a lawmaker from the main opposition Democratic Party who is among the four, told Yonhap by phone.

“We will strongly urge the Japanese government to apologize and provide legal compensation,” she said.

You, a member of a Diet committee on women and family affairs, will visit Japan together with Kim Hee-jung, Ryu Ji-young and Kim Hyun, all lawmakers from the ruling Saenuri Party and members of the same committee.

The Korean lawmakers plan to present the Japanese lawmakers with a resolution that You submitted to the National Assembly last week. The resolution condemns Japanese politicians’ remarks on comfort women and calls for an official apology.

They also plan to visit the Philippines later this week to meet with Filipino victims of Japan’s sex slavery and meet with local lawmakers on ways to jointly handle the issue.

Japan euphemistically refers to the wartime sex slaves as “ianfu,” which means “comfort women.”

Okinawa women’s groups including union condemn reactionary Osaka Mayor Hashimoto's justification of sex slaves
Okinawa women’s groups condemn Osaka Mayor Hashimoto's justification of sex slaves
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2013/05/16/national/okinawa-womens-groups-condemn-hashimoto-justification-of-sex-slaves/#at_pco=cfd-1.0

Pushback: Masako Ishimine (center), the head of a women's group in Okinawa, reads out a statement of protest targeting Osaka Mayor Toru Hashimoto on Wednesday in Naha. | KYODO
NATIONAL
Okinawa women’s groups condemn Hashimoto justification of sex slaves
BY TOMOHIRO OSAKI
STAFF WRITER

• MAY 16, 2013


Women’s groups and other parties in Okinawa Prefecture on Wednesday protested Osaka Mayor Toru Hashimoto’s contentious remarks about the wartime sex slaves, with some calling for his immediate resignation.

The outspoken mayor’s remarks came during a visit to Okinawa on Monday, where he also told reporters U.S military personnel stationed there should make more active use of the local sex industry so they can ease their sexual frustration in a legal manner.

He said the Japanese military’s wartime recruitment of Asian females to provide sex in frontline brothels was a necessary evil in order to “maintain discipline.”

The Okinawa arm of the National Federation of Regional Women’s Organizations and other women’s groups in and out of the prefecture jointly issued a statement condemning Hashimoto’s remarks as “an affront to dignity of all human beings regardless of sex” and a “justification of blatant discrimination.”

“People have justified rape as being caused by (men’s) inability to control their sexual urge, which we know is a lie,” the statement said, adding it is also a lie that “women who work in the sex industry have accepted their role as an outlet for sexual frustration.”

Similarly exasperated, Hiromi Hirayasu, secretary general of the women’s division in the Okinawa chapter of the National Confederation of Trade Unions (Zenroren), questioned Hashimoto’s suitability as coleader of Nippon Ishin no Kai (Japan Restoration Party) and called for his immediate resignation.

“I believe his remark aroused hostility not only in women in Okinawa, but those all over the world,” she told The Japan Times.

Pointing out Japan has been traditionally behind global standards in gender equality, Hirayasu voiced concern that Hashimoto’s statements might be taken by the international community as emblematic of the nation.

“What he said is absolutely unforgivable. We should all stand up to declaim against it,” she said.

Yonekichi Shinzato, head of the Social Democratic Party’s chapter in Okinawa, released a statement saying Hashimoto’s comments indicate “his lack of historical understanding and respect for the issue of human rights,” and demanded he retract them.

“All women have human rights and their dignity should be respected as human beings,” Shinzato said of Hashimoto’s remarks about present-day sex workers.

As for the wartime “comfort women,” Shinzato said Hashimoto’s comments “showed no consideration and apologies at all for the Asian women who were deprived of their human rights and dignity.”

Rightwing Racist Nationalist Osaka Mayor Toru Hashimoto Says Women Slaves During War Served Necessary Role
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/14/world/asia/mayor-in-japan-says-comfort-women-played-a-necessary-role.html
Women Forced Into WWII Brothels Served Necessary Role, Osaka Mayor Says
By HIROKO TABUCHI
Published: May 13, 2013


TOKYO — The mayor of one of Japan’s largest cities, who is seen by some as a possible future prime minister, drew an outcry on Monday after he said women forced into wartime brothels for the Japanese Army during World War II had served a necessary role in providing relief for war-crazed soldiers.

Toru Hashimoto, the populist mayorof Osaka, also said American soldiers stationed in Okinawa should make more use of the island’s adult entertainment industry, which he said would reduce the incidence of sexual crimes against local women.

Lawmakers and human rights groups swiftly condemned the remarks. So did South Korea, whose citizens made up the bulk of the so-called comfort women who served Japanese soldiers in military brothels.

South Korea’s Yonhap News quoted a senior government official there as saying Mr. Hashimoto’s comments exposed “a serious lack of historical understanding and a lack of respect for human rights.”

The conduct of the Japanese military in Asia before and during World War II remains a highly charged topic between Japan’s neighbors, who say Tokyo has not properly atoned for its history of wartime atrocities, and those, like Mr. Hashimoto, who feel that Japan has been unfairly demonized.

Some historians estimate that 200,000 women were rounded up from across Asia to work as comfort women for the Japanese Army. Other historians put that number in the tens of thousands, and say they served of their own will. Japan formally apologized to the comfort women in 1993.

Mr. Hashimoto told reporters in Osaka on Monday that they had served a useful purpose. “When soldiers are risking their lives by running through storms of bullets, and you want to give these emotionally charged soldiers a rest somewhere, it’s clear that you need a comfort women system,” he said.

When pressed later, he insisted that brothels “were necessary at the time to maintain discipline in the army.” Other countries’ militaries used prostitutes, too, he said, and added that in any case there was no proof that the Japanese authorities had forced women into servitude.

Instead, he put the women’s experiences down to “the tragedy of war,” and said surviving comfort women now deserved kindness from Japan.

Mr. Hashimoto is a co-leader of the Japan Restoration Association, a populist party with 57 lawmakers in Parliament. His comments followed those of a string of Japanese politicians who have recently challenged what they say is a distorted view of Japan’s wartime history. Last month, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe seemed to question whether Japan was the aggressor during the war, saying the definition of “invasion” was relative.

Mr. Abe’s comments heightened fears that he might seek to revise or even repudiate apologies that Japan has made to victims of its wartime conduct. The 1993 apology to comfort women and another in 1995 to nations that suffered from Japanese aggression during the war have been condemned by Japanese ultranationalists.

Mr. Hashimoto’s remarks swiftly drew widespread public rebuke.

“The comfort women system was not necessary,” said

apan Teachers Fight Right Wing Nationalists And Bullying Of Teachers By Union Buster Osaka Mayor Hashimoto Toru
Wednesday, April 11, 2012
http://labornetjp.blogspot.com/2012/04/tokyo-teacher-refuses-to-stand-for.html
Tokyo teacher refuses to stand for national anthem Kimigayo: “There should be no coercion in schools”
<201230b5.jpg>



Commencement was held on March 22nd at Akiruno Gakuen, a special-needs school for disabled children. The Kimigayo Coercion Ordinance came into effect in Osaka last year, but inTokyo teachers have been required to sing the National Anthem since 2003. At that time, more than one thousand teachers resisted by not standing up for the anthem, but recentlythe number has decreased to one digit. This year TANAKA Satoshi, a teacher at Akiruno Gakuen, refused to stand for the second time; the first time was at the enrollment ceremonylast April. Another well-known teacher resisting the coercion of Kimigayo, NEZU Kimiko, used to work at the same school. “I was the only one in Tokyo Metropolitan schools to refuseto stand in the last year’s enrollment ceremony. I must continue the struggle in solidarity with teachers in Osaka who are fighting under pressure. I also want to tell the children thatthere should be no coercion in schools”, commented TANAKA. (SASAKI Yumiko)
Video: 2 minutes interview
Photo: TANAKA with NEZU Kimiko on his left.

東京の教員が「君が代不起立」～教育の場で強制はあってはならない

3月22日、東京都立あきる野学園小中学部の卒業式が行われました。大阪府では橋下知事のもと、昨年「君が代」起立条例が成立しましたが、東京の学校では2003年以来10年近く、「君が代」の強制が続いています。最初は不起立をして抵抗の意志を示す教員も三桁を超えていましたが、ここ数年は一桁に減っています。そうした中、あきる野学園教員の田中聡史さん（43歳）は、昨年4月の入学式に続いて、この日二度目の不起立を行いました。あきる野学園は、根津公子さんが不起立を続けた学校でもあります。田中さんは、「昨年の入学式で不起立は東京都で一人だけだった。これをゼロにすることはできない。また大阪で、悩み闘っている人と連帯したい。子どもたちに教育の場で強制があってはならないことも伝えたかった」と語りました。（佐々木有美）
動画（2分・田中インタビュー） 写真＝不起立をした田中さん（左）と激励に駆けつけた根津公子さん（右）
Posted by ｙａｍａｓａｋｉ at 8:29 AM
Labels: Kimigayo, Nezu, Tanaka

Wednesday, April 11, 2012
http://labornetjp.blogspot.com/2012/04/osaka-school-workers-on-strike-no-to.html
Osaka school workers on strike! No to union bullying by HASHIMOTO
<201230b2.jpg>


8 part-time teachers and workers affiliated to the Osaka Educational Amalgamated Union launched a one-day strike on 16th March to protest the Kimigayo CoercionOrdinance and the Education Administration Basic Ordinance, imposed by Osaka City Mayor, HASHIMOTO Toru and his ruling party, the Osaka RestorationAssociation. “There is really no freedom of speech in public schools in Osaka. This strike is only the beginning. We will fight on”, said one of the strikers, HIRANOYoshio, an educational assistant. 7 union federations, including the Osaka Union Federation, Zenrokyo Osaka and Union Network Osaka protested the anti-unionpolicies of Mayor HASHIMOTO by jointly submitting a petition urging the withdrawal of the Education Administration Basic Ordinance.
(KIMURA Jo, Labornet Japan Kansai reporter)


ハシモトくん 労働組合なめんなよ！～大阪教育合同労組がストライキ

橋下徹大阪市政、および「大阪維新の会」による「君が代」起立斉唱条例、職員基本条例案、教育行政基本条例案が、大阪の教育現場の労働者の労働条件に大きな影響を与えるとして、大阪教育合同労働組合に加盟する非常勤教職員8名が、3月16日（金）朝の始業時より、一日ストライキを行った。ストライキに参加した、大阪市の教育活動支援員・平野良男さんは、「大阪の教育現場は本当にものが言えない状況になっている。今回のストライキはスタートにすぎない。これからも、続けて闘っていく」と語った。また、橋下市政の「労働組合敵視」政策に抗議して、大阪労連、大阪全労協、おおさかユニオンネットワークなど労組７団体は、「教育基本条例案」などの撤回を求める署名、および「申し入れ書」を共同して市に提出した。（関西報道部ライター・木村ジョウ）
Posted by ｙａｍａｓａｋｉ at 8:14 AM
Labels: Hashimato, Osaka Educational Amalgamated Union, strike

Osaka Rightwing Anti-labor Mayor Hashimoto Attacks Japan's Constitution

Mr. Hashimoto Attacks Japan's Constitution

Lawrence Repeta
The Hashimoto Survey
http://www.japanfocus.org/-Lawrence-Repeta/3728
On February 6, 2012 Osaka Mayor Hashimoto Toru issued an order to all Osaka City employees compelling them to disclose personal information concerning labor union activity, their support for political candidates, and other sensitive matters. The survey includes such questions as “In the last two years, have you participated in any activities in support of a particular politician?” and “In the last two years, has a co-worker ever requested that you vote for a particular politician?” It goes on to request the identities of such co-workers or others who invited the respondent to participate in political activities. Each respondent must provide name, employee number and work description. (An English translation of the Hashimoto Survey is found at the end of the article.)


Mayor Hashimoto Toru
Although most questions in the Survey require respondents to identify themselves, the Survey also provides directions to a designated “reporting window” that create the opportunity to snitch on one’s enemies anonymously. This episode is illustrative of ongoing threats to the already precarious status of individual rights in Japan.
Mr. Hashimoto’s cover note includes a stiff reminder that he’s the boss: “this questionnaire is not a voluntary matter. It requires factually correct responses from all employees by order of the Mayor. In cases where responses are not true, penalties may be applied.”
The audacity of this inquiry into workers’ political and union activities and relationships is breathtaking. This is an intellectual strip search designed to enable the Mayor to create detailed personal profiles of all Osaka City employees. If these survey results are compiled, Mr. Hashimoto will be able to identify his political supporters and opponents with a few key strokes and then be free to find ways to reward and punish at his leisure. Protections for fundamental rights have been embedded in democratic constitutions all over the world and in international human rights treaties precisely to protect against this kind of abuse of power.
Japan’s Constitutional Protections
In Japan’s case, most lawyers would quickly point to several constitutional provisions that might protect Osaka employees who seek to keep their political affiliations to themselves. There is Article 19, which guarantees “freedom of thought and conscience,” Article 21, which guarantees freedom of speech and association, and Article 28 which guarantees the right to organize. The national bar association issued a statement on February 16 making precisely these points. Noting that government employees enjoy constitutional protections, the JFBA statement labels the Survey as “an excessive restriction (on those protections) clearly lacking in necessity and propriety.” For the full text of the statement, see here.
Why would Mayor Hashimoto take such questionable action? Throughout history powerful leaders have declared that extraordinary circumstances compel them to put aside the ordinary rules in order to act decisively in the public interest. The Mayor must think his time has come. In a nation led by colorless men who mumble meaningless phrases in hope they will not offend anyone, Hashimoto is different. He is a charismatic leader, unafraid to speak his mind. People seem to crave this kind of leader; Osaka voters rewarded him with a big majority in last year’s mayoralty election.
Like most democratic constitutions, however, Japan’s version is designed to place fundamental rights beyond the reach of aggressive politicians. The courts are charged with reviewing the actions of government and determining whether or not they meet constitutional standards.
The right most directly threatened by Mr. Hashimoto may be Article 19 of Japan’s Constitution, which declares that “freedom of thought and conscience shall not be violated.” The Mayor may well respond that Osaka workers are free to hold any political beliefs and engage in any political activities they like, as long as they tell him what they are. This raises the question whether the right to freedom of thought and conscience includes a right to maintain the privacy or confidentiality of those thoughts. This question has appeared in various forms in cases decided by the Supreme Court of the United States.
U.S. Supreme Court Precedents—the Right to Anonymous Speech
Do people have the right to maintain anonymity in their political behavior? Nearly every country provides for secret ballots in elections, but what about political speech? Mr. Hashimoto tells Osaka workers, for example, that they must disclose whether they have “participated in any activities in support of a particular politician.” In a number of cases, the Supreme Court of the United States has upheld the right of anonymous speech. For example, in the landmark 1960 decision in Talley v. California, the Court voided a Los Angeles city ordinance that required anyone distributing handbills in the city to disclose their names and addresses on each handbill. The Court declared this unconstitutional, emphasizing “There can be no doubt that such an identification requirement would tend to restrict freedom to distribute information and thereby freedom of expression.”1
The U.S. Supreme Court has also stressed that the right to freedom of association is closely related to freedom of speech. According to the Court, “Effective advocacy of both public and private points of view, particularly controversial ones, is undeniably enhanced by group association.” The Court has also said that the freedom of association applies to virtually any form of group activity: “Of course, it is immaterial whether the beliefs sought to be advanced by association pertain to political, economic, religious or cultural matters…”2 The Hashimoto Survey requires respondents to disclose not only their own political activities, but to identify their union memberships and their comrades. This appears to be an attack on both their right to freedom of association and to free speech, due to the inevitable chilling effect produced by Hashimoto’s disclosure order.
The Right to Freedom of Association and the Right to Privacy
Probably the most famous “freedom of association” decision by the U.S. Supreme Court is a case that raised the constitutionality of the Alabama state government’s order to the NAACP to disclose the identities of its members. Aware of the close cooperation between the state government, the police, the Ku Klux Klan, and other racist organizations, NAACP leaders refused to disclose the membership list. They knew that if members were identified, they would be subject to retaliation, including police harassment and violent attacks.
In its 1958 decision, the Supreme Court addressed the same right to confidentiality of political associations attacked by the Hashimoto Survey. A unanimous U.S. Supreme Court closely linked the right of association to the right to privacy. In the Court’s words, the “privacy in group association may in many circumstances be indispensable to preservation of freedom of association.”3
In 1960, the Court confirmed that this right of privacy applies to government employees when it struck down an Arkansas statute that “required every teacher, as a condition of employment in a state supported school or college, to file annually an affidavit listing without limitation every organization to which he has belonged or regularly contributed within the preceding five years.” Noting that “the pressure upon a teacher to avoid any ties which might displease those who control his professional destiny would be constant and heavy,” the Court held the Arkansas requirement to violate the constitutional freedom of association.4 These decisions came at the end of a decade in which Senator Joseph McCarthy led a fierce attack on civil liberties of workers and intellectuals, including the rights to free association, to join unions, and to silence, in the 1950s in the United States.
Every reasonable Osaka employee will try to avoid “displeas(ing) those who control his professional destiny.” The Hashimoto Survey will inevitably have a chilling effect on union activities and on political activities – except perhaps for activities in support of the Mayor.
As noted above, in the United States the concept of freedom of association protects individuals who gather to promote a wide range of beliefs, including “economic” matters, thus encompassing union activities. In Japan’s case, the right of workers to organize is specifically protected by Constitution Article 28; thus, labor union lawyers argue that the Survey constitutes an unfair labor practice.
Although the U.S. Supreme Court has explained the close relationship between privacy and freedom of speech and association and other rights, neither the Constitution of Japan nor the United States explicitly guarantees a right to privacy. Over the past decade Japan’s local and national governments have nevertheless adopted rules protecting “personal information.” (kojin joho) Article 6 of Osaka city ordinance explicitly prohibits the gathering of information concerning “thought, beliefs and religion” or any other information that may be the cause of social discrimination (shakaiteki sabetsu), including “race, ethnic group (minzoku), or criminal history.” For the text of the ordinance, see here.
It almost seems as if the authors of this rule foresaw the coming of Mr. Hashimoto. Their language tracks Constitution Article 19 and clearly prohibits the city government from gathering the kind of information he seeks. This apparently robust protection, however, is transformed into a very weak reed by further language in Article 6 that empowers the government to set aside the ban when absolutely necessary (hitsuyo fukaji).
Judicial Review in Japan and the United States
As noted above, modern democratic societies rely on constitutions to provide the most important protection for individual rights. When government authorities restrict our rights, we rely on the courts to uphold them. In Japan, this is where the most serious problem lies.
Japan is not the United States and the Supreme Court of Japan has taken a very different approach to constitutional interpretation. One will search in vain for precedents like the American cases described above. In fact, in 65 years of litigation under Japan’s Constitution, its Supreme Court has never found even a single case where the actions of government have violated the constitutional rights of free speech or freedom of thought and conscience.
Many readers know that a series of cases involving constitutional claims to freedom of conscience were recently decided by Japan’s Supreme Court. These cases arose from confrontations between individual teachers and local boards of education, especially the Tokyo Board of Education, over compulsory rituals performed at public school ceremonies. (See “Politicians, Teachers and the Japanese Constitution: Flag, Freedom and the State,” http://www.japanfocus.org/-Lawrence-Repeta/2355) Hundreds of teachers refused orders to stand before the Hinomaru flag and sing the Kimi ga yo hymn. Penalized with salary cuts, removal from classrooms and assignments to a “re-education camp,” and other punishments, they filed suit. To explain their claims of violations to the right to belief and conscience, they filed individual statements with the courts describing the anguish and emotional injury they experience due to the powerful association of these pre-war rituals with worship of a divine emperor, the horrors of war and other features of authoritarian and militaristic government in pre-war Japan.
In 2011, all three panels of Japan’s fifteen-member Supreme Court issued final judgments against these teachers, holding that the governmental interest in promoting patriotism outweighs individual rights of conscience. (See Tom Ginsburg’s comment here. In a January 2012 ruling on the issue, a panel of the Supreme Court appeared to begin the process of rethinking its support for mandatory participation in these ceremonies. See http://ajw.asahi.com/article/views/editorial/AJ201201180032. Lonely dissenting opinions were published by two justices who had practiced as private attorneys prior to their appointments to the Supreme Court.
There can be no doubt that the light regard for freedom of conscience displayed by the Court in these cases emboldened Hashimoto and his advisors to take one more step. Hashimoto has also persuaded the Osaka City Assembly to pass an ordinance requiring teachers to stand and sing the kimi gay yo anthem. See http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/national/T120229005537.htm. The Supreme Court itself opened the door to the Hashimoto Survey. Recent reports indicate that Hashimoto may recognize that he’s gone too far and withdraw the Survey. But in view of the supine posture adopted by the Supreme Court when confronted by claims for protection of individual rights, we can expect Mayor Hashimoto and others to continue to crack the whip, seeking ways to impose their preferred rituals and beliefs on members of Japanese society who do not share them.
Osaka City Government Survey
February 9, 2012
To All Employees
Concerning this Survey
Illegal and improper political and union activities by city employees have appeared one after another.
I have requested Special Advisor Nomura Shuya to conduct a thorough investigation to clarify the circumstances. It is my intention to drain and remove this festering wound. (nou wo dashikiritai)
As an initial step, I am conducting the attached survey under the supervision of Special Adviser Nomura.

Please complete the survey with the following points in mind.
1. This survey is not voluntary. This is an order from the office of the Mayor requiring all employees to provide accurate factual responses. Those not providing accurate responses will be subject to punishment.
2. The answers to the survey questions will be seen only by a special team composed of members individually appointed by Advisor Nomura. (All members will be from outside City Hall.)
These answers will not be seen under any circumstances by your superiors, the Office of Personnel Management, or any other employee of City Hall.
Survey responses will be collected via the official portal or an affiliated department. All precautions have been taken so that there will be no leaks of information. Therefore, if you answer the questions truthfully, please be assured that there will be no trouble in the workplace, and no detriments from a personnel point of view.
In addition, in the event that you truthfully report your own illegal acts, the degree of punishment will be reduced from the standard; there will be no dismissals except in especially egregious cases.
With the foregoing in mind, please respond truthfully and accurately.
Osaka Mayor
Hashimoto Toru (signed)
Reference (Attachment)
Use the “Survey Site” of the official portal for your responses. Paper responses will not be accepted, so please use the “Survey Site.”
Q1 Please write your name.
Q2 Please write your employee number.
Q3 Please indicate your department.
Q4 Please indicate the nature of your work.
(Translator’s note: This question is followed by a list of 49 work categories.)
Q5 Please indicate your rank.
(Translator’s note: This question is followed by a list of 10 ranks.)
Q6 Have you participated in any labor union activities conducted by Osaka City Hall unions concerning work conditions? (Those presently not affiliated with unions please answer citing past experiences).
Note: You need not write the names of persons who invited you. You can submit such information anonymously to the reporting window identified at the end of this survey.
1. I was not invited. I participated on my own.
2. I participated because I was invited.
What was the nature of the activity?
Who invited you?
The place where you received the invitation?
The time you received the invitation?
3. I have not participated, but have been invited.
What was the nature of the activity?
Who invited you?
The place where you received the invitation?
The time you received the invitation?
4. I have never participated nor been invited.
5. I have never joined a union.
Q7 In the last two years, have you participated in any activities in support of a particular politician? (This includes cases where you provide addresses of acquaintances or similar information to political campaigns or attend public speeches by politicians.) (Please answer regardless of whether or not you are a member of a union.)
Note: You need not write the names of persons who invited you. You can submit such information anonymously to the reporting window identified at the end of this survey.
1. I was not invited. I participated on my own.
2. I participated because I was invited to do so by a union.
What was the nature of the activity?
Who invited you?
The place where you received the invitation?
The time you received the invitation?
3. I participated because I was invited by someone outside the union (e.g., a superior).
What was the nature of the activity?
Who invited you?
The place where you received the invitation?
The time you received the invitation?
4. I have not participated but have been invited to do so by a union.
What was the nature of the activity?
Who invited you?
The place where you received the invitation?
The time you received the invitation?
5. I have not participated but have been invited to do so by someone outside a union (e.g., a superior).
What was the nature of the activity?
Who invited you?
The place where you received the invitation?
The time you received the invitation?
6. I have never participated nor been invited.
Q8 In the last two years, has a coworker ever requested that you vote for a particular politician? (Please answer whether or not you are a member of a union.)
Note: You need not write the name of the person who requested you to vote. You can submit such information anonymously to the information window identified at the end of this survey.
1. I have been so requested.
a. Request from a union (including union officers).
Who requested you to vote?
b. Request from someone unrelated to a union (e.g., a workplace superior).
Who requested you to vote?
The place where you received the request?
The time you received the request?
2. I have not been so requested.
Q9 The following questions concern so-called “Introduction Cards.” (This is a card with the purpose of providing information concerning relatives and acquaintances to the political campaign of a specific candidate.)
Note: You need not write the name of the person who handed you the card, requested that you hand out the cards, or told you not doing so would be a disadvantage. You can submit such information anonymously to the information window outlined below this survey.
(1) In the last two years have you ever been handed an “Introduction Card?”
1. Yes, and I accepted it.
Who gave you the card?
Where? (e.g., at the office)
When? (e.g., during a lunch break)
2. Yes, however I did not accept it.
Who gave you the card?
Where?
When?
3. I distributed “Introduction Cards.”
Who requested you to hand out the Cards?
What was the means of distribution?
4. I have never been handed an “Introduction Card.”
(2) Please answer only if in question (1) you answered that you “accepted.”
Did you fill in and return the card?
1. I filled in the card with information about my acquaintances, relatives, etc. and returned the card.
2. I returned the card without filling in any information about my acquaintances, relatives, etc.
3. I did not return to the card.
(3) Please answer only if in question (2) you answered that you filled in the card and returned it. What was the reason for filling in the card and returning it?
1. Because I wanted to support the candidate mentioned in the card.
2. I was told that I would suffer some disadvantage if I did not cooperate.
Who told you?
Where were you told?
When were you told?
What kind of disadvantage?
3. I was not directly told that not cooperating would be a disadvantage, but I thought that not filling in the card and returning it would result in a disadvantage.
Why did you feel that way?
What kind of disadvantage did you think would result?
Q10 Do you think union officers are given preferential treatment at the workplace? (Please answer whether or not you are a member of a union.) If that is the case and it is difficult to specify such preferential treatment, explain the concrete circumstances.)
1. Yes
Reason:
The reason it is difficult to specify:
2. No
Q11 The following questions concern hiring. (Choose all that apply. Please answer whether or not you are a member of a union or not.)
1. Some people have been given preferential treatment in hiring based on the recommendation of a politician.
2. Some people have been given preferential treatment in hiring based on the recommendation of a union officer.
3. Some people have been given preferential treatment in hiring based on the recommendation of a city employee.
4. Some people have been given preferential treatment in hiring based on the recommendation of someone other than a politician, union officer, or city employee. (Specify: )
5. I myself have been given preferential treatment in hiring based on the recommendation of one of the above.
(Specify: ________)
(Note: As a response to the lack of transparency in hiring of current employees, I am considering the establishment of a research system (kenshu seido); there will be no terminations solely because such a hiring took place.)
6. There are no cases of someone receiving preferential treatment in hiring based on a recommendation.
Q12 In the last two years, has an election ever become a topic of conversation at the workplace? (Choose all that apply. Please answer whether or not you are a member of a union.) Also, did you feel as if the intent of the conversation was to request your vote?
1. The topic came up during a chat with coworkers during break.
2. The topic was raised by a union officer during work hours in a conversation related to his/her official duties.
3. The topic was raised by a union officer during work hours, however the topic was not raised in a conversation related to his/her official duties.
4. The topic was raised by a superior during work hours in a conversation related to his/her official duties.
5. The topic was raised by a superior during work hours, however the topic was not raised in a conversation related to his/her official duties.
6. The topic was raised by co-workers or subordinates during work hours in a conversation related to their official duties.
7. The topic was raised by co-workers or subordinates during work hours, however the topic was not raised in a conversation related to their official duties.
8. The topic has never been raised.
Q13 Please select from the following list union and election activities which are thought to not be improper. (Choose all that apply. Please answer whether or not you are a member of a union.)
1. I find no problem with union activities held outside work hours and at the workplace.
2. Even if during work hours, I find no problem with union activities held outside the work place.
3. I find no problem with electioneering activities held outside work hours and at the workplace.
4. Even if during work hours, I find no problem with electioneering held outside the work place.
5. I do not consider asking for one’s coworkers’ relatives’ contact information to be electioneering.
6. I do not consider distributing postcards supporting a candidate to one’s coworkers to be electioneering.
7. I do not consider asking one’s coworkers to attend a candidate’s speech to be electioneering.
Q14 The following questions are concern how you felt about Osaka City public relations activities during the past 2 years. (Choose all that apply. Please answer whether or not you are a member of a union.)
1. The contents of documents distributed to city residents have supported the policies of specific candidates.
(Specify: )
2. Benefits directed to city residents have increased prior to elections.
(Specify: )
3. Advertising broadcast over television and radio have increased prior to elections.
(Specify: )
4. The policies of specific candidates were promoted through coordinated activities of city residents.
(Specify: )
5. Other.
(Specify: )
6. I have not particularly noticed anything.
Q15 Please describe any other concerns or observations regarding union or election activities in Osaka City.
( )
Q16 Are you a member of a union?
1. I am a member.
2. I am not currently a member, however I was one in the past.
What is the reason for you no longer participating?
a. I am no longer qualified to be a member.
b. Other.
For those who selected “other,” please explain. (This question is voluntary.)
3. I have never been a member.
Please explain why you have never joined a union. (This question is voluntary.)
Q17 What do you feel are/were the merits of being a member of a union? (Please choose all that apply. Even if you are not currently a member of the Union, please answer this question. This question is voluntary.)
1. I do not feel there are any particular merits, but everyone is a member and so I joined too.
2. Because you can get along better with coworkers.
3. Because you can participate in a lot of recreational activities.
4. Because by joining, information becomes easier to acquire.
5. Because it would have a positive impact on promotions and transfers.
6. Other. (Explanation:______________ ________________________________)
Q18 What do you feel is the strength of unions? (Please choose all that apply. Please answer regardless of whether or not you are a member of a union.)
1. Unions can improve work conditions.
2. It is easy to be hired with the recommendation of a union officer.
3. Unions have the power to influence policies of the City government.
4. Unions can have a positive influence on promotions and transfers of employees.
5. One can acquire much information related to the City government’s policies.
6. One can acquire muchinformation related to employment personnel.
7. One can network with powerful figures in the local community.
8.Other. (Explanation: _______________________________________________.)
Q19 What do you feel are the disadvantages of not joining (or quitting) a union? (Choose all that apply. Please answer regardless of whether or not you are a member of a union.)
1. It had a negative influence on relationships at the workplace.
2. There is a risk that it will negatively affect opportunities for promotion.
3. There is a risk of being transferred to an undesirable place.
4. Necessary information for accomplishing work tasks will become harder to obtain.
5. Powerful figures in the local community will keep an eye on you and make life difficult.
6. Other. (Explanation:______________________ __________________________)
Q20 Have you ever discussed improvement of compensation or other work conditions with a union? (If you are not presently a member of a union, please respond concerning past experiences.) If you have, what were the places and times?
1. I have discussed treatment at the workplace with the Union.
Where did the discussion take place?
When did the discussion take place?
2. I have never discussed treatment at the workplace with the Union.
Q21 Do you know in what ways the dues you have paid are being used by unions?
1. I am receiving ample explanation on how the dues are being used.
2. I am not sure, but I believe the funds are being properly used.
3. I am not sure, and I am troubled about whether or not the funds are being properly used.
4. I am not sure and I do not particularly care about the way the funds are used.
Q22 Following the 2005 “Employee Preferential Treatment Problem,” efforts were made to make employer-employee relationships more fair. How did this affect your workplace? (Please answer whether or not you are a union member.)
1. Employer-employee relationships throughout the city have been made fairer, including in my workplace.
What were the previous problems?
2. Employer-employee relationships have been made more equal throughout the city, however the problem still persists in my workplace.
What is the current problem?
3. Nothing has really changed, and inequality in the employer-employee relationship still exists.
4. Other opinions. Please explain.
“Reporting Window” Report Deadline: March 15, 2012 (Thursday)
Mail:
Osaka Reporting Window
Attorney Nomura Shuya
Mori, Hamada, Matsumoto Law Offices
Marunouchi Park Building
2-6-1 Marunouchi, Chiyoda-ku
Tokyo 100-8222
Fax: 03-6212-8240 (Osaka Reporting Window Attorney Nomura Shuya)
E-mail: shuya.nomura [at] mhmjapan.com
Lawrence Repeta is a professor of law at Meiji University in Japan and an Asia-Pacific Journal associate. He is author of the chapter on law and society in the “Handbook of Japanese Culture and Society," edited by Theodore C. Bestor and Victoria Bestor. He is the author and translator of the survey.
Recommended citation: Lawrence Repeta, 'Mr. Hashimoto Attacks Japan's Constitution,' The Asia-Pacific Journal, Vol 10, Issue 13, No 1, March 26, 2012
Notes
1 Talley v. California, 362 U.S. 60 (1960)
2 Both quotations are from NAACP v. Alabama, 357 U.S. 449, 460-61 (1958)
3 NAACP v. Alabama, 357 U.S. 449, 462 (1958).
4 Shelton v. Tucker, 364 U.S. 479 (1960).
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Tokyo Spring" group.
To post to this group, send email to tokyospring [at] googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tokyospring+unsubscribe [at] googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tokyospring?hl=en.

Hashimoto Stalks Anthem Foes-Japan Teachers To Be Punished For Not Standing Up For Reactionary "Kimigayo" Anthem

http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20110527a2.html

Friday, May 27, 2011

Hashimoto stalks anthem foes

By ERIC JOHNSTON
Staff writer
OSAKA — Osaka Gov. Toru Hashimoto has stepped up his long-running feud with teachers opposed to the "Kimigayo" national anthem by pushing his political group to propose an ordinance that would force them to stand when the song is sung at school ceremonies.



Photogenic: Voters take photos of Osaka Gov. Toru Hashimoto (center) during campaigning last July for a candidate from the political body Osaka Restoration Group.KYODO PHOTO
Hashimoto's Osaka Restoration Group, which consists of socially conservative politicians and older, former members of the Liberal Democratic Party, sent the proposal to the prefectural assembly Thursday.

With Osaka Restoration holding 57 of the assembly's 109 seats, the proposal is expected to be approved by the end of this month.

It would by the first time a prefectural government has passed such an ordinance.

"It's not unreasonable to punish public school teachers who reject orders from a principal to stand up," Hashimoto told reporters in mid-May. "If they don't like it, they can quit. It's a problem of organizational management, not a question of individual thought or consciousness."

The proposed ordinance doesn't contain specific punishments for teachers who refuse to stand. Hashimoto and the Osaka Restoration Group are preparing to introduce a separate ordinance later this year that would spell out such punishments. The governor also wants to publicize the names of teachers who refuse to stand during the anthem.

Since taking office in 2008, Hashimoto and his supporters have publicly clashed with local teacher unions and prefectural officials who oppose the singing of "Kimigayo," and have sought ways to curb the power of the unions. The unions have opposed Hashimoto, calling him a dictator, and have supported political candidates and parties opposed to the Osaka Restoration Group.

Many of Hashimoto's supporters are also in favor of introducing textbooks that emphasize patriotism and what they say are traditional Japanese values that emphasize group harmony over individualism.