Saturday, June 24, 2006

By KAHO SHIMIZU

Staff writer

The Supreme Court dismissed an appeal Friday by 278 plaintiffs charging that Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi violated their rights by failing to maintain the constitutional separation of state and religion when he visited Yasukuni Shrine in 2001.

Plaintiff Masaharu Hishiki holds a banner Friday that reads, "The Supreme Court flees from making a decision on the Constitution" outside the court after a lawsuit demanding damages for mental distress caused by Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi's 2001 visit to Yasukuni Shrine was rejected.

The top court ruled that Koizumi's visit to the Tokyo war shrine did not infringe on the plaintiffs' rights, upholding a 2005 ruling by the Osaka High Court rejecting the plaintiffs' claims.

The case was the first top court ruling over Koizumi's contentious visits to Yasukuni, which have caused diplomatic friction with China and South Korea.

"The act of an individual visiting a shrine is not something that interferes with others' religious faiths," presiding Justice Isao Imai said. "Therefore, even if someone finds it distasteful if others visit a particular shrine, it does not immediately hold them liable for damages. And this (logic) also applies to the case of a prime minister visiting Yasukuni Shrine," the court said in its decision.

As in the rulings by the Osaka District Court and Osaka High Court, the Supreme Court declined to rule on whether Koizumi violated the Constitution, saying there is no need to judge the constitutionality of his visit because the plaintiffs' claims were baseless.

The top court also declined to give an opinion about whether the visit was official or private, even though Koizumi signed the shrine guest register with his title.

The suit was filed against Koizumi after his first visit as prime minister to Yasukuni on Aug. 13, 2001, two days before the 56th anniversary of Japan's World War II surrender.

The plaintiffs branded the ruling as "sophistry" and criticized the top court for shirking its responsibility to make a legal judgment on the constitutionality of Koizumi's shrine visit.

"It is regrettable that the Supreme Court used sophistry in this ruling," Ryuken Sugahara, a plaintiff whose father was killed in the war, told reporters after the ruling was handed down. "By paying homage to the war dead, Koizumi is using the war dead to deny Japan's war responsibility, which causes us great pain. I wonder how other Asian nations will react to this ruling."

Plaintiff Masaharu Hishiki added: "It is obvious that Koizumi's visit constitutes a violation of the Constitution. . . . And the nation's judicial system has the responsibility to prevent him from visiting."

The plaintiffs filed the suit against Koizumi, the state and the shrine, seeking 10,000 yen in damages per plaintiff, and a court ruling that the visit violated Article 20 of the Constitution, which defines Japan as a secular state.

In February 2004, the Osaka District Court rejected the plaintiffs' demands but issued no opinion whether Koizumi's visit violated the Constitution. However, it ruled that Koizumi went to the shrine in his official capacity.

We welcome your opinions. Click to send a message to the editor.