OTARU ONSEN LAWSUIT
WRITTEN TESTIMONIES BY PLAINTIFFS
SUBMITTED FOR HEARING SEVEN, MARCH 11, 2002, SAPPORO DISTRICT COURT
(English Translations--original Japanese texts of these
testimonies here)
(click here to go to an index page for Hearing Seven
in English and Japanese)
(click here to go to the Otaru Lawsuit Index Page)
Click here to page down to:
ARUDOU DEBITO'S WRITTEN TESTIMONY
DATED MARCH 11, 2002
(Japanese Original)
As a person excluded as a foreigner, I would like to make a statement as follows:
1. Before I was refused entry to Defendant Yunohana (hereinafter "Yunohana")
on September 19, 1999, I had lived in Japan a full ten years. In that interim, I
had experienced many types of discriminatory treatment due to nationality. Refused
by hotels because there were fears I could not use futon bedding, refused an apartment
due to "no pets, no gaijin" rules, refused entry to restaurants and shops.
I also was the object of much bullying when I worked for a Japanese company. This
is why my being refused by Yunohana interlocked (rendou) with these longtime experiences
of discrimination.
2. But even then, Yunohana's treatment is a special case.
I found particularly disagreeable Yunohana's reasoning, "Russians caused problems,
but we can't tell the difference between Russians and foreigners, so we have no choice
but to refuse all foreigners".
I first heard about Yunohana's policies through the internet but found them hard
to believe. They were not looking at people as individuals--since not all Russian
sailors individually caused trouble--and moreover were applying this to all foreigners.
Did Yunohana ever stop to consider how dangerous this logic is, how much damage to
society it inflicts? However, since I could not rely on hearsay, I went to see for
myself on September 19, 1999, with my and my friends' families.
We went as families because, of course, we wanted to take a bath. But the other
reason was that we wanted to demonstrate to the management that not all foreigners
are troublemakers or short-term Russian sailors. We have in fact been here for many
years, building families and making a living like anyone else. However, fellow Plaintiff
Karthaus, one other American man, and I were all refused entry. Of course, this was
a shock, but the bigger shock came when we saw how our Chinese friend was treated.
She was allowed in. Here we realized that Yunohana was clearly selecting people not
by nationality, but by physical appearance.
My wife here asked a question about our children's future. What would happen to our
two daughters? Management: "The Japanese-looking one can come in, but the one
which looks like a foreigner (gaijin mitai) with the brown hair and blue eyes we
will refuse." These two daughters have the same parents, meaning the only qualification
for entry is whether she looks more like her mom or her dad. Here I realized my interracial
daughter is not an object of discrimination by nationality, but by race.
I would like Yunohana to consider for just an instant the feelings of a parent at
this stage. If their children were refused entry based solely on physical appearance,
do they think they as a parent would just let it pass? I ache when I think that my
child might be polluted (okaseta) by my DNA, producing an appearance that my daughter
was born with and can do nothing about, and be refused entry to places, where people
frequent all the time, because of me. Can they even consider just how much mental
duress that inflicts on people, when they see how much their lives are now being
limited? Quite simply, what happens when my children, who were born and raised in
Japan, and have Japanese citizenship, say, "Daddy, why did you give birth to
me? The appearance you gave me is a hindrance. I'm excluded from my friends because
of you." I believe that this quite possibly lead to them denying their own identities.
From what happened on September 19, 1999, I began to fear just how dark the future
could be for parents and children of different races living in Japan, and how inhuman
(hi-ningenteki) and insulting these policies of Yunohana were.
3. However, once I started digging deeper, I realized that Yunohana was merely the
tip of the iceberg. Yunohana is not the only establishment refusing foreigners. Other
bathhouses (Osupa and Panorama, in Otaru), other industries (taxis, apartment rental
places, a barbershop, a sporting goods store), other cities (Wakkanai City's "Yuransen"
bathhouse, Monbetsu City's "Hamanasu" party district), Nemuro City's "Akebono"
bathhouse, Otaki-mura's "Kawasemi" Onsen) do it too, and the manager of
one even justified it by saying, "Otaru is doing the same thing."
I felt that this discrimination was spreading, and the window of access to public
and social conveniences was closing. That is why I decided I must do something to
stop this.
4. I would like to stress something here. Before we took this case to court, we spent
fifteen months trying to resolve this situation with social appeals. We talked to
the bathhouses on several occasions. We visited the outlying regions of Monbetsu
and Wakkanai, talked to various managers, and all searched for more humane solutions
to these problems. Consequently, we deepened our mutual understandings. Some onsens
and stores took their signs down. Others acknowledged that foreigners or people who
look foreign are people, residents, taxpayers and bonafide contributors to society.
The manager of Otaru bathhouse "Osupa" became my personal friend. We turned
lead into gold. So bringing this before the court was in fact the last resort.
5. Yunohana, in contrast, showed not an inkling of a will to compromise. Even though
there were two events (sponsored by the Otaru University of Commerce and Hokkaido
Shinbun, Otaru Branch) where the City, onsens, and affected peoples could meet and
discuss, Yunohana declined to attend. Moreover only Yunohana refused to participate
in the Otaru City Hotline, or to display multilingual bathing rules produced by Otaru
City, or take any measures which would ameliorate the problem. The onsen which had
the most unpleasant way of refusing people was Yunohana.
For example, Yunohana hired Russian- and English-speakers on their staff. This was
not to explain the rules to people better. This was to refuse people in their own
language. Further, when the public eye turned towards them and voices demanded they
take down their JAPANESE ONLY signs, they put up a sign in Japanese only which said
"[policy change] under consideration" for over a year, and continued to
refuse. After I received my Japanese citizenship and visited Yunohana on October
31, 2000, they still refused me entry, even after I showed them certified proof that
I am a Japanese. This was, I felt, nothing else than racial discrimination. No matter
how hard we tried to explain our standpoint, it was only Yunohana which showed absolutely
no consideration, which increased the disappointment and frustration.
6. On January 16, 2001, news of our intention to sue Yunohana hit the newspapers.
It was only then when Yunohana finally removed their exclusionary sign. However,
they put up instead a new one with arbitrary conditions for entry (duration of stay,
degree of Japanese language comprehension, degree of bathing rules comprehension,
and the will to follow them absolutely) and applied it only to foreigners. I felt
this was a substitution of one form of discrimination for another. I felt this was
certainly no result of Yunohana ever reflecting very deeply (hansei) on their actions.
This is why we continued the lawsuit.
7. Next, I would like to explain why we included the City of Otaru as a Defendant.
Some might rebuke, "Why are we suing Otaru City when they took several measures
to deal with this problem?" I agree with this to some extent, but this does
not change the fact that they ignored discrimination within their city for seven
years, and only when it apppeared in the press did they do anything about it. Even
then the measures taken were not enough.
Defendant Otaru has produced as evidence a bunch of letters they received from cityfolk,
residents, tourists and visitors complaining about the bathhouse exclusions. The
answers the City sent back, they claim, are evidence that the Defendant took measures
to do something about this. I disagree--I think it means exactly the opposite. These
letters are the embodiment of people's pain--the result of people who were hurt so
deeply they spent hours and hours to write to protest this unfair treatment. Even
with this, all the City said was essentially, mechanically over and over again (itten
bari), "This is a private-sector business, so go to another place which will
accept foreigners." Did they think that the recipients would feel any better
receiving a letter like this? Of course not. From 1994 until the Autumn of 1999,
this was the way Otaru City just played for time and ignored the problem. Even though
Otaru City was the benificiary of money from foreign residents, tourists and visitors,
it ultimately would not take any effective measures to relieve these people of their
hurt.
Only after this issue hit the press from September 21, 1999, did Otaru City make
any moves. They convened two meetings of "groups concerned with international
communication" (kokusai kouryuu kanren dantai renraku kaigi), and took measures
to ameliorate the language barrier (with signs of bathing rules in Russian, Japanese,
and English, as well as distributing pamphlets on bathing rules at Customs). They
established a so-called "24-hour Hotline".
Unfortunately, I ultimately only see these as "alibi" measures (aribai
teki na sochi). At these two meetings not one foreigner was ever present (the City
refused our attendance twice), and the third meeting, where foreigners were actually
to be allowed attendance, was cancelled by the City. In a city which has over 30,000
Russian visitors, the City only produced a mere 4,000 Russian-language bathing-rule
pamphlets. And they only distributed them once. As for this "Hotline",
the only subscribers allowed were former excluding bathhouses "Osupa" and
"Panorama", not foreign residents or the general public. In fact, this
"Hotline" was no more than two people in the City international office's
cellphone numbers.
In addition, Otaru City continuously refused to sponsor a forum where the general
public, onsens, foreigners, and the city government could attend. A public promise
to hold a "Human Rights Convocation" (jinken mondai konwakai) in August
2000 is still on hold.
In fact, even an onsen manager who once excluded foreigners is angry at the City
for its lack of a positive stance on the matters. The manager of "Osupa"
decries (fungai), "It's been over a year, and I have not received any word from
the City. The City is just ignoring the problem."
In January 2002, Otaru City finally put out after years of hiatus a new guidebook
in Russian for tourists (not for residents). It is not an exaggeration to say that
the "International City of Otaru" (kokusai toshi Otaru shi) still has a
very poor international consciousness.
Otaru City responds, "We followed the rules. The City has done nothing wrong."
What a philosophy. The City is perfectly able to avoid administration limited by
rules--simply by creating new rules. Otaru can certainly pass an ordinance which
forbids racial discrimination.
In October 2001, the City of Hamamatsu, the site of the Ana Bortz lawsuit against
discrimination, released the "Hamamatsu Sengen" (Hamamatsu Declaration),
with the mayor calling for administrative improvements towards foreigners. Otaru
City has shown no positive steps like these. In contrast, the City has left the petition
we submitted to the City Council, calling for an ordinance against racial discrimination,
buried in committee.
Otaru gets several million US dollars a year in international trade, but does little
to improve friendly relations with foreigners. We have talked to Otaru City many
times, but never have they tried to take up the problem with any sincerity or grit.
Otaru, the epicenter of "signposted racial discrimination" in Hokkaido,
is being irresponsible.
8. Finally, I would like to say what disappoints me the most about this whole affair.
It is the "lost chance". Onsens and public bathhouses in Japan are very
special places. It is the only place where Japanese can really relax. Only in a bathhouse
do you see Japanese without their neckties on, lying about naked. Only in a bathhouse
do you see women walking about with no makeup on. It is a place where people can
associate without barriers and regardless of language. However, some bathhouses troubled
by foreigners which adopted exclusionary strategies, and a City which just let it
ride, lost a great chance for Japanese and non-Japanese to get to know each other
well (hadaka no tsukiai). Ultimately, this has inflicted a terrible amount of social
damage on Japan and Otaru.
For the sake of people of many races living in Japan, for the sake of their children,
and for the sake of building a society which is easy to live in regardless of nationality
or appearance, I pray that there is a favorable judgment in this case.
OLAF KARTHAUS'S WRITTEN TESTIMONY
DATED MARCH 11, 2002
(Japanese Original)
Otaru - What Happened
9.19.1999
We arrived at the parking lot and got out of our cars. My wife Yuki and daughters
Yumi Katharina and Tami Maria entered the building and bought tickets at the vending
machine for all of us. I approached the building and saw a big sign left of the entrance
reading in red, "Japanese Only".
When I entered the building, together with my son Daniel Tatsuo, I started to remove
my shoes. A clerk apoached us and said that foreigners couldn't enter.
"Why?" I replied.
"Sorry, we have that policy, because Russian sailors cause trouble."
"We are no Russian sailors and we are here with our wives and kids."
During that time, my daughters were alrerady running around the lobby and trying
to enter the womens section. Obviously they liked to be in an onsen (as usual). We
had to call them back, because we, David and I, could not enter.
A kind of lengthy discussion started in which another manager was called.
The same argument, that Russian sailors cause trouble was repeated. "But we
are not Russians" I replied. The manager said that they could not distinguish
between Russians and other Caucasians and that banning Russians only would be discrimination.
Thus they would ban all foreigners.
Somebody of our group replied that they have admitted a Chinese lady just minutes
ago. The manager replied that this was a mistake and that she could not enter, because
she was a foreigner.
Most of that time I had Daniel on my arm, since he was too weak to stand for a longer
time. The clerks could definitely see that I was with a boy and that he was the child
of a Japanese national. Thus the manager denied Daniel, a 1- year-old Japanese boy,
to enter Yunohana. He definitely could not enter with me, since I was banned. Nor
was it acceptable to enter with his mother into the women's section. Going by himself
to the men's section was out of the question, since he was physically handicapped
and could not undress himself. In the bath there would be the danger that he slips
and injures himself, even drowns. Thus not only I, a Caucasian, but also my son,
a Japanese national, was banned from entering Yunohana.
After maybe 15 minutes of discussion we gave up to enter, and we had our tickets
refunded. When going out, one of the clerks accompanied us and suggested that we
should visit some other onsen. "But other places, for example MyCal, are more
expensive" I replied. He said that he would check the situation and went into
the building. After a minute or so he appeared again and told me that he had checked
and that MyCal would admit foreigners. But he did not comment on the point that MyCal
is more expensive.
Our children were very disappointed not being able to enter Yunohana, so we went
to MyCal Otaru, paid a higher price than it would have been in Yunohana and let the
children have a bath.
The issue of race versus nationality
I sincerely doubt that Yunohana staff checks the nationality of each customer.
The case of the Chinese lady in our group has shown that Japanese-looking persons
can enter, while people of other races are banned. This is not an issue of nationality,
but of race. Thus this is racial discrimination.
Why did we attempt to enter knowing that there is a sign?
Japan is a country where many problems can be resolved by discussion.
One example: I know the story where two Germans made a cycling tour in Japan. They
flew into Narita, unpacked their bicycles, and cycled to Osaka. In Rinku Town they
tried to board the JR train to Kansai Kuko. JR regulations require a bag for bicycles
on trains. Their airplane was due to leave in a few hours and there was no possibility
to get bags for their bicycles in time, and no other easy way to go to the airport.
Eventually, even though it was forbidden, the JR employees allowed the couple to
take their bicycles on the train. Even though this is a totally different situtation
(JR has regulations to forbid unpacked bicycles. There is no government regulation
to ban foreigners from bathing.), a discussion could solve the problem.
I thought by speaking with the Yunohana staff, we could convince them that we, as
a Japanese family, would do no harm to their business. Being a permanent resident
and with my Japanese wife and my Japanese children I thought we could convince them
that we are regular customers, like any other Japanese.Our sincere intention to bathe
was further proven by the fact that our wives had already bought the tickets. If
we would have been allowed in, we would have taken a bath.
The effect on our children
Our children were very disappointed not being allowed to bathe. They were with
their family and friends and expected to have a good time. In the following months,
I went for a couple of times to Otaru. Every time I went, the chldren would say "Papa,
take care (kiotsukette). You will be refused again. Ganbatte, ne." Even though
they were 5 and 7 years old, they could not forget what happened.
My expectation towards Yunohana
My expectation was that I would be let in in September 1999.When this didn't
happen, I thought that further discussions will solve the problem. I tried for more
than a year to convince Yunohana that we as permanent residents, knowing the bathing
customs and so on, would pose no harm to their business. But there was no progress
and Yunohana did not change their policy of discrimination.
I also expected that the management or the owner would approach us and apologize
for their behaviour. I expected an apology towards me and my family. This is still
possible, except the fact that my son died, and thus cannot hear an apology, even
if it would be eventually made. We were refused in Sept 1999 and Daniel died August
2000. Yunohana had nearly one year to solve the problem, contact us and apologize.
That they didn't, makes me very sad.
Actually my final reason to sue Yunohana and the City of Otaru was due to the fact
that with Daniel's death the whole negotiation process has come to a dead stop. We
were in contact both with Yunohana and the city since September 1999. The only progress
that has been made was that two other sentos took down their signs, but the biggest
issue -- our being refused at Yunohana -- was still unresolved. But I was prepared
to wait and to continue discussions. With Daniel's death all this had come to an
abrupt end. Suddenly I realized that all my good will towards Yunohana and the City
was not getting us anywhere. Until August 2000 the ill-will of Yunohana could have
been wiped away by a timely apology. After Daniel's death this was not possible anymore.
This was a big shock for me and this point still hurts very much. Before losing more
time in fruitless discussions I saw no other way out but to sue.
My expectations towards the City of Otaru
Soon after the incident my wife wrote a letter to the major of Otaru. His reply
was more than disappointing. After being refused, I had no place to go to. Onsen
kumiai, the police, jinkenyogobu, could not help. Yunohana is not in the onsen kumiai.
No apparent crime was made, so the police couldn't do anything. The jinkenyogobu
has no legal standing to intervene in an effective way.
So my expectation was that the City of Otaru, as the local government, could end
this blatant discrimination. The means are be plentiful: From issuing a warning to
revoking their license.
But everything the city did was half-hearted and had little impact. I till think
that the government, local or national, has the duty to ensure the basic freedom
of its inhabitants.
To have my basic human rights violated and seeing that the local government does
nothing to protect me, nor my children makes me feel very helpless. If the government
does not help in such a minor issue, what can I expect when my human rights are severely
resticted and in question? For example, with the same prejudice (Russian sailors
do not behave and harm our business) other businesses could discriminate (Russians
steal thus supermarkets should ban foreigners from shopping; foreigners don't pay
their medical bills thus foreigners can't go to hospitals anymore). Apparently there
is no effective way in Japan to forbid discrimination and this makes me very sad
and insecure.
The aftereffects of Yunohana for me: Nayoro, May 2001
I was cycling from Asahikawa to Nayoro. It still was cold and I was looking forward
for a warm place to stay. At Nayoro eki I saw an advertisement for Piyashiri Onsen.
I called them and asked if they have a room. The whole conversation was made in Japanese
and they said that a room is free. When they asked my name, I had the fear that they
would turn me down by hearing my foreign name.
The refusal of entry in Otaru have a lasting effect on me. Now, whenever I reserve
an hotel, visit onsens for the first time, I often think that I maybe refused on
the basis of my race.
I live my daily life as any Japanese national.
I teach at a university. I could well be in the position to teach Yunohana's owners
son or daughter. I am accepted in this society. I work for this society. I pay taxes,
I do research for the advancement of science and technology in Japan. I do all this
because I live in this country and I want to make it a very livable place.
I do what is expected of me in this society, so I deserve the respect of the society.
1. I have an elderly friend who lives in a care house in Otaru. Because he is
in poor health, it is difficult for him to get out, so I have been traveling to Otaru
each month for the past 7 years. I am therefore quite familiar with Otaru.
In Spring 1999, I was visiting that friend with my wife. On the way back, we thought
we would enjoy an hot spring bath. That was when I first became aware of Yunohana.
However, we did not try to enter Yunohana then, we went to another Onsen called "Osupa".
I was refused entry to Osupa. I was extremely surprised, and at the same time felt
a deep wound in my heart.
2. That Summer (July 1999), I was returning from hiking when I thought I'd take a
bath at Yunohana. However, when I saw the "Japanese Only" sign, I gave
up. I was shocked. Otaru claims to be an "International City", yet they
allow such things to happen.
3. In the Fall of 1999, plaintiffs Arudo and Karthaus began their activity concerning
establishments that refuse entry to foreigners. I thought that the problem would
be resolved through their efforts, but only Yunohana refused to budge. There was
no progress at all. I had personally been refused entry to Yunohana so I felt extremely
angry.
4. On December 23, 2000, I went back to Yunohana in order to obtain evidence. I bought
a ticket, but when I tried to hand it to the clerk, he said "We're very sorry,
but we refuse foreigners." When I asked why, he said "That is our policy."
I asked for my money back and left.
5. I have lived here for 12 years. In that time I have tried to learn Japanese language
and customs. That is why I was so disappointment when I was refused. No matter how
hard I try to learn bathing manners, in the end I am still a "foreigner"
and will be refused.
6. My hobby is outdoor sports. I love the splendid nature of Hokkaido. That is why
I have enjoyed hot baths after hiking or skiing all over Hokkaido. I have never had
trouble entering Onsens in other cities.
7. This court case was begun over a year ago. During that time we have heard various
opinions from many people. Some in support, others against. The people who oppose
us are not limited to Japanese, many foreigners are against us.
Some of the complaints against us include: foreigners bring soap into the bath, they
harass the female staff, they steal things, foreigners should use their bath at home,
Russian fishermen come to the bath reeking of fish, etc.
Or, some take the angle that the owner of the Onsen is conducting a business. His
livelihood depends on his customers. "You are suing just to make money,"
"You're exaggerating your claims," "You live in Sapporo, but you went
to Otaru to cause trouble," etc.
Or "You white people from America and Germany are the biggest racists. You should
abandon this case and solve your racial problems in America and Europe first.."
And on and on, we have been bombarded with these kinds of arguments.
8. On November 11, 2001, I received the following e-mail.
Your claim is groundless.
First, you are a citizen of the country with the most violent
discrimination, you are the most shameless people.
You should first work to eradicate discrimination in your own county before
making claims against Japan.
Aside from foreigners just being foreigners, they cannot comprehend
Japanese customs and culture.
But the arrogance of white people is obvious.
Especially Americans.
Aren't you even aware of your embarrassment?
Know your place!
I believe that your values are absolutely and universally wrong, yet you
apply them to other people.
You're making a nuisance of yourselves.
The terrorist attack on NY is confirmation of this.
American hypocrites use the word "Globalization" (Fraud! It's
"Americanization") to stomp out other cultures.
If you do not stop this, there will likely be a second terrorist attack.
You should be ashamed of yourselves!
And you Americans love court action, you are abusing the Japanese
administration of justice.
Apologize for this curse you have placed on the Japanese people! (they
complained against you by asking you not to enter the bath)
Anyway, either drop your case, or abandon your claims and go home!!!
PS: When you say "We will mind our manners", you make me laugh!
Even if you mind your manners, I'm sure other foreigners won't.
9. A second message was received a few days later, the day after American Airlines
flight 578 bound for the Dominica Republic crashed into the Queens neighborhood of
New York, killing 265 people, an apparent accident.
So America has experienced another terrorist attack.
Even I was surprised that my warning was realized so soon.
That's how much people hate Americans.
You say that you are "Japanese"?
Don't make me laugh!
If you were Japanese, you wouldn't undertake such a stupid lawsuit.
Because our hearts are caring.
You're a typical American. With your lawsuit, you're trying to make money
from what should be a sacred system, and in the name of righteousness,
you're pushing your own opinion and using every excuse you can think of,
while you show no respect for your opponent's position.
Apparently, you have filed this lawsuit to disturb Japanese social order,
and no Japanese are on your side.
Foreigners have bad manners, and often commit brutal crimes.
Nowadays when we see a foreigner, we assume we see a criminal.
Especially American military, Muslims, Chinese, Philipinos, South Americans
and Russians (they all seem to be ethnically inferior)
If businesses are prohibited from refusing foreigners, can you guarantee
protection of sacred Japanese lives and property from the crimes of that crowd?
You can't, can you?
If you can't, then it is obviously more valuable to allow Japanese the
right to practice discrimination than to allow foreigners protection
against discrimination.
Be honest, you don't want to share the same bath with someone of a
different race.
During the war, America put Japanese in concentration camps and committed
terrible acts of violence. A little discrimination in Japan is nothing next
to that!
For just being refused a bath, you complain like women.
Get out of Japan now!!!
Now in Japan, zenophobia is beginning to stir.
Allowing in many immigrants, like Europe and America, would be a foolish
thing for the government to do, Internationalism will cause an eruption, I
suspect.
If that happens, you Americans will be rejected, from the first.
The reasons for that are, America forced Japan to attack Pearl Harbor with
its strategy of strangulation of Japan, then dropped the atomic bomb on us,
forced a crappy constitution on us, and set about complete destruction of
the Japanese soul by flooding us with your lower than frog piss, vulgar,
vacuous culture! America carries a huge burden of guilt.
10. We have also received mail stating "You are just suing in order to get money."
But all that we want out of this case is to be able to enter an Onsen like anyone
else.
ENDS
(Return to an index page for Hearing Seven in English
and Japanese)
(Return to the Otaru Lawsuit Index Page)