Human Rights Committee

Concluding observations on the sixth periodic report of Japan*

The Committee considered the sixth periodic report submitted by Japan (CCPR/C/JPN/6) at its 3080th and 3081st meetings (CCPR/C/SR.3080 and CCPR/C/SR.3081), held on 15 and 16 July 2014. At its 3091st and 3092nd meetings (CCPR/C/SR.3091 and CCPR/C/SR.3092), held on 23 July 2014, it adopted the following concluding observations.

A.Introduction

The Committee welcomes the submission of the sixth periodic report of Japan and the information presented therein. It expresses appreciation for the opportunity to renew its constructive dialogue with the State party’s delegation on the measures that the State party has taken during the reporting period to implement the provisions of the Covenant. The Committee is grateful to the State party for its written replies (CCPR/C/JPN/Q/6/Add.1) and supplementary information to the list of issues, which were supplemented by the oral responses provided by the delegation, and for the supplementary information provided to it in writing.

B.Positive aspects

The Committee welcomes the following legislative and institutional steps taken by the State party:

(a)The adoption of the Action Plan to Combat Trafficking in Persons, in December 2009;

(b)The approval of the Third Basic Plan for Gender Equality, in December 2010;

(c)The amendment of the Publicly Operated Housing Act in 2012, to the effect that same-sex couples are no longer excluded from the publicly operated housing system;

(d)The amendment of the Nationality Act in 2008 and of the Civil Code in 2013, which removed discriminatory provisions against children born out of wedlock.

The Committee welcomes the ratification by the State party of the following international instruments:

(a)International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, in 2009;

(b)Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, in 2014.

C.Principal matters of concern and recommendations

Previous concluding observations

The Committee is concerned that many of the recommendations made after the consideration of the State party’s fourth and fifth periodic reports have not been implemented.

The State party should give effect to the recommendations adopted by the Committee that are contained in the present concluding observations , as well as those in its previous concluding observations.

Applicability of the Covenant rights by national courts

While noting that treaties ratified by the State party have the effect of domestic law, the Committee is concerned at the restricted number of cases in which the rights protected under the Covenant have been applied by courts (art. 2).

The Committee reiterates its recomme ndation ( see CCPR/C/JPN/CO/5, para.  7) and calls up on the State party to ensure that the application and interpretation of the Covenant form part of the professional training of lawyers, judges and prosecutors at all levels, including the lower instances. T he State party should also ensure that effective remedies are available for violations of the rights protected under the Covenant . The State party should consider acceding to the Optional Protocol to the Covenant , which provid es for an in dividual communication procedur e.

National human rights institution

The Committee notes with regret that, since the abandonment in November 2012 of the Human Rights Commission Bill, the State party has not made any progressto establish a consolidated national human rights institution(art. 2).

The Committee recalls its previous recommendation ( see CCPR/C/JPN /CO/5, para.  9) and recommends that the S tate party re consider s establishing a n independent na tional human rights institution with a broad human rights mandate, and provide s it with adequate financial and human resources, i n line with the principles relating to the status of national institutions for the promotion and protection of human rights (the Paris principles ) (General Asse mbly resolution 48/134, annex).

Gender equality

The Committee is concerned at the State party’s continuing refusal to amend the discriminatory provisions of the Civil Code that prohibit women from remarrying in the six months following divorce and establish a different age of marriage for men and women, on the grounds that it could “affect the basic concept of the institution of marriage and that of the family” (arts. 2, 3, 23 and 26).

The State party should ensure that stereotypes regarding the roles of women and men in the family and in society are not used to justify violations of women ’ s r ight to equality before the law. The State party shoul