WWIN News NO.12 May.７.2003
Heightened NGO Activities – on the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women BY Nikkei Shimbun, February 25, 2003
The NGO’s are increasing their activities regarding the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (Convention), which facilitated the enactment of the Equal Employment Opportunities Law. The Japanese Government submitted the 5th periodic Report on the implementation of the Convention last autumn, which will be considered by the Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) next July. The NGO’s are publishing counter-arguments to the Government Report, and have begun active lobbying.
On the 3rd of this month Feb, at the NGO hearing at the CEDAW Working Group held at the UN Headquarters Building, thirteen representatives of NGO’s, including the Japanese Association of International Women’s Rights, Working Women’s International Network, etc., gathered from Japan. Four out of twenty-three experts who are CEDAW members, including the Chairperson took part in the Working Group session to listen to the Japanese situation from the NGO’s representatives. The purpose of the session was to collect information and materials to prepare questions for the consideration of the 5th Government Report. The session lasted an hour, and there were some detailed questions from the CEDAW members.
The NGO’s came together to cooperate for the Working Group session. Responding to the appeal from Ms. Akamatsu, the Chairperson of the Japanese Association of International Women’s Rights, they set up a “Japan NGO Network for CEDAW.” Currently, there are about twenty NGO’s participating in the Network. The five organizations, which went to the UN Headquarters, coordinated the areas they would be responsible for, and organized their presentations within five minutes each.
The 5th Report, which will be considered in July, will focus on the institutional progress made in Japan towards the realization of equality, including the implementation of the Basic Law on Gender Equal Society and the establishment of the Gender Equality Bureau in the Cabinet Office. Regarding the issue of measures to prevent indirect discrimination (regulations and systems, which may be gender neutral, but has a disadvantageously discriminatory effect on either one of the gender), on which the government was asked to report at the previous consideration in 1994, the report merely states that the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare plans to set up a forum for discussions. Japan has ratified the Convention itself, but not the Optional Protocol, which was adopted in 1999 to increase its effectiveness, and its stance remains ambiguous.
The NGO’s are particularly interested in the issue of ratification of the Optional Protocol and of indirect discrimination.
“Please ask how Japan is considering the ratification of the Optional Protocol.” Mrs. Miho Watanabe of the Association of the Status of Women appealed to the members. Recently, women in their 30’s, who are company employees, as well as younger academics, are participating in the Association, broadening its membership.
The government is hesitant about ratifying the Optional Protocol because the instrument includes an individual complaint mechanism, in which individuals, who did not receive satisfactory remedies within the domestic system, can file a complaint directly to the CEDAW. It is concerned that problems may arise in the relationship with the domestic justice system.
Faced with such government attitude, the Association issues a periodic journal on timely issues regarding women. It plans to organize briefing and study meetings after February to call for the ratification of the Optional Protocol.
The Working Women’s International Network, whose members include the plaintiffs of the ongoing court cases on gender discrimination against corporate employers, was responsible for presenting the issue on indirect discrimination. A female employee working for a trading company told the members that the Network believes that the ‘general’ track in the track-based personnel systems and the situations regarding part-time and other ‘non-regular’ employees amount to indirect discrimination, and asked the members to question the government on that view.
The Network will continue information activities using the internet as well as organize meetings to work towards enhancing the effectiveness of the Convention. The Network members also plan to come to the United States for the July session.
The enactment of the Equal Employment Opportunity Law and the Child Care Leave Law, the amendment of the Nationality Law, and mandatory home economics for boys as well as girls were all made possible by the ratification of the Convention. The policies regarding women in this country has received a strong boost from the Convention. The NGO’s have, historically, supported the legislations by lobbying the Ministry of Labour, which was at that time the actual negotiating party at the UN meetings and domestic coordination, as well as holding study meetings. Professor Yamashita says that the NGO’s hope to continue this trend, and work towards a restrained cooperative relationship with the government without engaging in confrontation.
CEDAW sent its list of questions on the 5th Periodic Report to the Japanese government in mid-February. Questions include those on indirect discrimination, employment conditions of part-time workers, and the ratification of the Optional Protocol. In July, when the government will meet with the CEDAW members for consideration of the report, including its response to the questions, about fifty members of NGO’s will be present to listen to what the government has to say.
The Plaintiffs of Sumitomo Electric : Ms Katsumi Nishimura made a speech at Precession of CEDAW on 3th February 2003
First of all, I would like to thank the members of CEDAW, for giving us the time to speak. My name is Oonaka, and I will be interpreting for the speakers, to speak on behalf of Japan, the plaintiffs, who are pursuing legal cases against Sumitomo Electric and Sumitomo Metal for wage sex discrimination, and of WWN, which supports the plaintiffs. I bring before you a report on the situation of sex discrimination in Japan made apparent during the trials, as well as our recommendations.
My name is Katsumi Nishimura. I started working for Sumitomo Electric right after graduating high school, and have worked at the company for 37 years.
My name is Kinuko Ishida. I started working for Sumitomo Chemicals right after graduating high school, and have worked at the company for 40 years.
We are suing for wage discrimination compared with male employees, who started working in the same year as we did, with the same educational background, and in the same clerical jobs. The men transferred to professional track jobs a few years after starting work, and have been promoted regularly to management jobs. In Sumitomo Electric, there was no opportunity for women to transfer to the other track jobs. In Sumitomo Chemical, although there was a system for transfer, it was an exceedingly high hurdle for women. When women requested transfer, they were told, ”You shouldn’t only do work that catches attention. It is sufficient if you stick to defending the home front,” and most of them were left in the general track jobs. As a result, there is a maximum wage discrepancy of 250,000 yen per month, compared with male employees with the same educational background and working years. The women earn only 60% of these men. We felt extremely frustrated as if we had been denied being a person.
At the previous examination of the Japanese government report in 1994, we submitted a counter-report to you, and came to listen through the session. We remember the Members’ comments being right on the mark.
(The Committee noted further with interest that, despite the introduction of the Equal Employment Opportunity Law, individual discrimination continues.
The Government of Japan should ensure that the private sector complies with the provisions of the Equal Employment Opportunity Law and report on the measures taken to address the indirect discrimination faced by women.)
We reconfirmed the correctness of the Convention, and started to file suit at the courts in 1995. But 5 years after that, in 2000, the courts dismissed all arguments by the plaintiffs in rulings filled with gender bias.
The judgment admits the existence of notable difference in wages between men and women. The reason for the difference is because men were hired in categories for management candidates, and women were excluded from those categories to be maintained in general track jobs. The court declared the policy a violation of the objectives of Article 14 of the Constitution prohibiting discrimination on grounds of sex. However, the court went on to say that at the time the plaintiffs started working for the company, there was still a strong sense of traditional gender role divisions; that men supported the family financially, and women married, stayed at home to concentrate on household work and child raising; that women were inefficient labour force, who retired from work early. The court also declared that the company had the right to pursue its profits, and therefore was not illegal even if the company adopted a employment management policy of gender-based hiring, which resulted in difference in wages. The policy was admissible, due to the social understanding of the times and the primacy of corporate efficiency. We appealed right away, and the case is currently pending in the Appeals Court.
In the trial document submitted by the government last November, the government states that the Convention does not require all discrimination to be eliminated immediately. Even if there was continued discrimination at present because of past gender-based hiring, according to the same document, it occurred before the ratification of the Convention, therefore the Convention does not apply. The government continues with its arguments based on social understanding, etc., in violation of international commitments and twisting the objectives of the Constitution.
We strongly appeal for the appropriate application of the Convention, and prohibition of indirect discrimination, such as those covered by hiring categories. If the government had introduced measures against indirect discrimination based on the recommendations of this Committee 9 years ago, it would have been effective in our lawsuits, as well as in eliminating discrimination against part-time and other non-regular labour, prevalent today. We are making our greatest efforts to win our case, and are demanding that the government apply the Convention correctly.
We have compiled a paper, in view of the examination of the government’s report in July, explaining about the discrimination in workplaces in Japan. We hope that it will provide you with further information about the situation in Japan, and assist you in your discussions with the Japanese government delegation.