mytest

Books, eBooks, and more from Dr. ARUDOU, Debito (click on icon):

UPDATES ON TWITTER: arudoudebito
DEBITO.ORG PODCASTS on iTunes, subscribe free
“LIKE” US on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/debitoorg
https://www.facebook.com/embeddedrcsmJapan
http://www.facebook.com/handbookimmigrants
https://www.facebook.com/JapaneseOnlyTheBook
https://www.facebook.com/BookInAppropriate
If you like what you read and discuss on Debito.org, please consider helping us stop hackers and defray maintenance costs with a little donation via my webhoster:

All donations go towards website costs only. Thanks for your support!

When Japan’s first actual law against hate speech was passed in January this year, critics (naturally) decried it as a means to stifle freedom of speech. I took exception to that, saying that it was a step in the right direction, at least. Recent articles in the Mainichi Shinbun seem to bear that out. Here is is the second of three (the first is here), talking about the positive effects of the law, where once-daily hate rallies are down, xenophobic language is softened and made less normalized, administrative organs now have means of enforcement, and even court cases are ruling in favor of targeted victims. Good. Read on.  Dr. ARUDOU, Debito

//////////////////////////////

Effect of new anti-hate speech law spreads to executive, judicial branches

June 6, 2016 (Mainichi Japan)
http://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20160606/p2a/00m/0na/012000c

Bulletin boards at the Ministry of Justice in Tokyo’s Kasumigaseki district are filled with 49 posters calling against hate speech campaigns, in this picture taken on June 3, 2016. The anti-hate speech law went into force that day. (Mainichi)

A new law aimed at eliminating hate speech campaigns, which instigate rejection of specific racial or ethnic groups from local communities, came into force on June 3. While the legislation has proven effective in some parts of the country, such as in Kawasaki where the court handed down a provisional injunction banning a hate speech rally in an area home to many Korean residents, there remain challenges that need to be addressed.

【Related】NPA to crack down on hate speech demonstrators through existing legislation
【Related】Court bans planned anti-Korean hate speech rally in Kawasaki
On June 5, a hate speech demonstration in Kawasaki was called off after participants were surrounded by hundreds of citizens protesting against the rally and police urged them to discontinue the event. The organizers terminated the rally after demonstrators paraded only about 10 meters down the road, in what was going to be the country’s first such demonstration since the anti-hate speech law came into effect.

The incident came three days after the Kawasaki branch of the Yokohama District Court issued a provisional injunction prohibiting a hate speech demonstration within a 500-meter radius of the office of a social welfare organization supporting Korean residents in the city. The decision forced organizers of the June 5 rally to change their plans, including the location for the event.

In October 2013, the Kyoto District Court handed down a ruling banning the Zaitokukai (Citizens against the special privileges of Korean residents in Japan) from staging hate speech demonstrations near the then Kyoto No. 1 Korean Elementary School and ordered the group to pay compensation. The ruling accused those demonstrations of “racial discrimination” in light of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. The ruling was later finalized by the Supreme Court.

The June 2 provisional injunction issued by the Yokohama District Court’s Kawasaki branch also quoted the same international treaty, as well as the anti-hate speech law that had just been enacted in May. The ruling called hate speech rallies “illegal actions that infringe upon the personal rights for leading a peaceful life” and pointed out that grossly illegal hate speech campaigns, such as repeating loud chants with bullhorns, lie “outside the bounds of freedom of assembly and freedom of expression guaranteed under the Constitution.”

“The ruling conveys the court’s indignation over hate speech,” said a senior official at the Ministry of Justice about the provisional injunction going as far as to ban a planned hate speech demonstration in advance. The ministry was behind the submission of the anti-hate speech bill to the Diet.

Signs of change are also emerging in police responses over the issue. In step with the anti-hate speech law coming into effect, the National Police Agency issued a notice to prefectural police departments across the country asking them to strictly respond to hate speech demonstrations by making full use of existing legislation such as that against defamation and contempt.

Because the anti-hate speech legislation does not have any punitive provision or clause prohibiting such activities, it is impossible to crack down on hate speech with the law alone. It is said the use of roads for any demonstration must be granted in principle. Nonetheless, hundreds of riot police and other officers from Kanagawa Prefectural Police were mobilized at the site of the June 5 rally to prepare for any emergencies.

Yasuko Morooka, a lawyer who authored a book titled “Hate Speech towa nanika” (What is hate speech?), hails the anti-hate speech legislation, saying, “The law provides support for courts, local bodies and police in making a decision on their strict responses to hate speech.”

The new law, however, has its own limits. In order to provide relief to victims who suffered damage from hate speech, they still need to prove in detail violations of their personal rights and defamation, just as they needed to before the law came into effect. The June 2 provisional injunction banning a hate speech rally became viable as there existed crystal-clear damage in Kawasaki, where the organizers of the planned rally had repeatedly staged similar demonstrations on about a dozen occasions.

A senior Justice Ministry official said, “The court decision could be different if the expression used in the announcement for a hate speech demonstration was different. I’m not sure if the courts would issue a similar provisional injunction in other cases.”

ENDS

//////////////////////////////////////////////////

Original Japanese:
クローズアップ２０１６
ヘイトスピーチ　新法効果、行政・司法に
http://mainichi.jp/articles/20160606/ddm/003/040/070000c
毎日新聞2016年6月6日　東京朝刊

特定の人種や民族を地域社会から排斥することを扇動するヘイトスピーチの解消をうたった対策法が３日、施行された。ヘイトスピーチを伴う街宣活動（ヘイトデモ）について、川崎市内の在日コリアン集住地域での実施を禁じる司法判断が出るなど早くも新法の波及効果が出ているが、なお課題も残る。

厳しい対応、後押し
対策法施行後、最初とみられるヘイトデモが５日に予定されていた川崎市。主催者側は道路で行進しようとしたが、デモに反対する数百人の市民らが取り囲むなど騒然とした雰囲気に包まれ、約１０メートル進んだところで警察の説得を受け入れて中止となった。

今回のデモを巡っては、横浜地裁川崎支部が２日、在日コリアンが多いエリアにある事務所から半径５００メートル以内での実施を禁じる仮処分を決定。主催者側は場所などの計画の変更を迫られた。

こうした司法判断の先例としては、京都朝鮮初級学校（京都市）前での街宣活動を巡る京都地裁判決（２０１３年１０月）がある。国連の人種差別撤廃条約を根拠に街宣を「人種差別」と指摘し、周辺での街宣禁止と損害賠償を「在日特権を許さない市民の会」側に命じた（最高裁で確定）。

２日の仮処分決定の特徴は、同条約に加えて先月成立したばかりの対策法を引用した点にある。対策法が定義するヘイトスピーチを「平穏に生活する人格権に対する違法な侵害行為」ととらえた上で、拡声機を使って大音量で繰り返すなどヘイトデモの違法性が著しいケースは「憲法が定める集会や表現の自由の保障の範囲外」と指摘した。デモを事前に差し止めるという踏み込んだ判断に、法務省のある幹部は「ヘイトスピーチに対する裁判所の憤りを感じる」との感想を漏らした。

警察の対応にも変化の兆しがみられる。警察庁は施行に合わせて、（名誉毀損（きそん）罪や侮辱罪などの）現行法を駆使してヘイトデモに厳しく対処するよう各都道府県警に通達。対策法は禁止や罰則がない「理念法」で、ヘイトスピーチ自体を取り締まることはできない。デモの前提となる道路使用も原則許可しなければならないとされる。それでも、５日の現場には、神奈川県警の機動隊員など数百人を動員し、不測の事態に備えた。

「ヘイト・スピーチとは何か」の著書がある師岡康子弁護士は対策法の意義について「裁判所や自治体、警察がヘイトスピーチに厳格に対処する判断の後押しになってきている」と語る。

もちろん、効果には限界もある。ヘイトスピーチの被害救済についても、被害者側が人格権侵害や名誉毀損などを具体的に証明する必要があるという状況は施行前と変わらない。２日の仮処分決定は、主催者側が過去十数回、市内で同種デモを繰り返しており、被害が明白だったことが差し止めを可能とした。

法務省幹部は「例えば、デモを呼びかける告知の表現が一つ違えば司法判断は変わりうる。他のケースで差し止めが認められるかは分からない」と言う。【鈴木一生、川上晃弘】

各自治体、試行錯誤　努力義務に温度差
法務省が３月公表した実態調査（２０１２年４月〜１５年９月）によると、ヘイトデモの発生のピークは１３、１４年だが、「沈静化したとは言えない状況」にある。こうした中、スタートした対策法は国にヘイトスピーチ解消の責務を、自治体には努力義務を課しているが、その「努力」には温度差がある。

５日に中止となった川崎市内のデモでは、市は事前に、主催者側が集合場所として申請した公園２カ所の使用を許可しなかった。対策法が定義する「差別的言動」に当たると判断したためだ。市人権・男女共同参画室は「難しい判断だった。新法なしに不許可は出せなかった」。仮処分決定と同様、市が対策法の趣旨を最大限生かそうとしたことがうかがえる。

逆に、名古屋市では先月２９日、同市中区の公園を出発点にヘイトデモが行われた。「（利用申請の）書類に不備がない」ことが許可の理由だった。河村たかし市長は翌日の記者会見で「何をしてもいいというわけではないが、表現の自由も大事」と述べた。

独自の取り組みを進める自治体もある。大阪市では７月１日、ヘイトスピーチ抑止に向けた全国初の条例が施行される。市に被害の申し立てがあれば、国際法学者や弁護士らでつくる審査会が「ヘイトスピーチに該当するか」を調査。答申を受けた市長が「該当する」と判断した場合、その内容と団体・個人名を市のホームページで公表する。ネット上の差別的な書き込みも施行日以降に残っていれば対象になる。吉村洋文市長は「法律は（被害者救済のための）具体的な措置がなく不十分。市条例には盛り込まれており、抑止になる」と強調する。【太田圭介、三上剛輝、岡崎大輔】

============================

Do you like what you read on Debito.org?  Want to help keep the archive active and support Debito.org’s activities?  We are celebrating Debito.org’s 20th Anniversary in 2016, so please consider donating a little something.  More details here.