No. 5: The Otaru onsen case ('99-2005)
This lawsuit followed the landmark Ana Bortz case of 1999, where a Brazilian plaintiff sued and won against a jewelry store in Hamamatsu, Shizuoka Prefecture, that denied her entry for looking foreign. Since Japan has no national law against racial discrimination, the Bortz case found that United Nations Convention on Racial Discrimination (CERD), which Japan signed in 1995, has the force of law instead. The Otaru case (Zeit Gist, June 3, 2008) (in which, full disclosure, your correspondent was one plaintiff) attempted to apply penalties not only to an exclusionary bathhouse in Otaru, Hokkaido, but also to the Otaru city government for negligence. Results: Sapporo's district and high courts both ruled the bathhouse must pay damages to multiple excluded patrons. The city government, however, was exonerated.
Why this matters: Although our government has repeatedly said to the U.N. that "racial discrimination" does not exist in Japan ("discrimination against foreigners" exists, but bureaucrats insist this is not covered by the CERD, the Otaru case proved it does, establishing a cornerstone for any counterargument. However, the Supreme Court in 2005 ruled the Otaru case was "not a constitutional issue," thereby exposing the judiciary's unwillingness to penalize discrimination expressly forbidden by the Constitution.
With your current subscription plan you can comment on stories. However, before writing your first comment, please create a display name in the Profile section of your subscriber account page.