TOP > Statements and Appeals > Universal Periodic Review

The International Movement Against All Forms of Discrimination and Racism (IMADR), a Tokyo based international human rights NGO in consultative status with the United Nations’ Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), welcomes the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) of the human rights situation in Japan, conducted in the United Nations Human Rights Council today.

The Universal Periodic Review is a new procedure, whereby the overall human rights situation of all member states of the United Nations is reviewed in the United Nations Human Rights Council. The Human Rights Council is the primary organ to deal with human rights issues and questions in the United Nations. The Council, which replaced the former United Nations Commission on Human Rights under United Nations reforms, consists of 47 member states who are elected on the basis of their commitment to the protection and promotion of human rights. Japan is currently a member of the Council, and has today undergone the review of its human rights record, in the second ever session of the Council’s working group on the UPR.

The UPR process is conducted on the basis of three reports. The first report is prepared by the state under review. A second report, compiled by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), summarizes the views of United Nations human rights treaty bodies and special procedures on the human rights situation of the country under review in recent years. The final report is a compilation of submissions by other stakeholders such as civil society groups and national human rights institutions.

IMADR was involved in the preparation of a joint NGO submission to the OHCHR, for inclusion in the stakeholders’ compilation report for Japan’s UPR. Signed by 51 co-signatory organizations, this report raised a number of human rights issues which were taken up in the interventions of various states during Japan’s review today. In particular, IMADR welcomes the interventions by member and observer states which raised key human rights issues such as the non-existence within Japan of an independent, effective national human rights institution established in accordance with the Paris Principles, the lack of an anti-discrimination law or any prohibition of discrimination in the criminal code and the need for further measures to improve the human rights situation of asylum seekers, refugees, migrant workers and minority women. A number of countries also recommended that Japan recognize the competence of human rights treaty bodies to hear complaints from individuals regarding alleged violations of their rights under various human rights conventions Japan has already ratified. In particular, states recommended that Japan ratify the optional protocols to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Convention Against Torture and the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women in this regard, and recognize the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to hear individual complaints. Today, the Council also welcomed measures taken by the Japanese government to address trafficking in persons, whilst encouraging further measures to ensure the protection of the rights of victims, and to rehabilitate them.

IMADR regrets that the Japanese government did not take the opportunity presented by the UPR to give true consideration to the views and questions posed and engage in a meaningful, interactive dialogue in respect of its human rights issues. Regrettably, the government delegation used the opportunity to continue to assert its established position, for example in respect of the issues of comfort women and the indigenous Ainu. The government also failed to discuss the reasons for ongoing delays in the establishment of an independent, effective national human rights institution in accordance with the Paris Principles, an issue which was raised by many states.

In response to questions regarding ongoing discrimination in Japan, as highlighted by the Special Rapporteur on Contemporary forms of Racism, the government mentioned the constitutional prohibition of discrimination. This however did not demonstrate a true commitment to discuss the lack of any legislative measures to define discrimination in law, to implement this prohibition or to provide remedies for victims. Japan still does not have any legislation defining and prohibiting discrimination, including between private individuals, as required to implement its obligations under the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD).

IMADR looks forward to the adoption of the report on Japan’s review by the Council’s working group next Wednesday 14 May, and the listing of the various recommendations made by member and observer states in respect of the above issues. Once adopted by the working group, the Japanese government has the opportunity to reply to the conclusions and recommendations made in this report. The government can reply either in writing, any time up to the next plenary session of the Council beginning on 2 June 2008, or orally in the 1 hour debate on their review which will be conducted during that plenary session. The UPR report will then be formally adopted by the Council, in a format which includes Japan’s responses. IMADR hopes that the Japanese government will utilize these further opportunities to reply to the recommendations and conclusions in the UPR report, in order to consider and engage with the issues raised by other states in a more meaningful way. It is also hoped that Japan will seriously consider the acceptance of many of these recommendations, to ensure that they can be implemented. Finally, IMADR hopes that following formal adoption of the report, Japan will take up the recommendation made by the United Kingdom today, and ensure that civil society is fully involved in the national process of follow up and implementation of the recommendations accepted by Japan.