1. In the “Yoshimi Case,” in which Chuo University Professor Emeritus Yoshimi Yoshiaki sued the (then) Japan Restoration Party member of the House of Representatives Sakurauchi Fumiki for defamation, Professor Yoshimi's appeal was dismissed on June 29, 2017 at the Supreme Court First Petty Bench (Justice Koike Hiroshi), with the extremely unjust decision not to accept the appeal (hereby, “supreme court decision”).
2. The origins of this suit are in the former Mayor of Osaka Hashimoto Toru's statement in May 2013 that “it is clear to anyone that the comfort women system is necessary.” Following criticism both domestically and from abroad, former Mayor Hashimoto gave a speech to explain himself the same month at the Foreign Correspondents' Club of Japan. At that time, in response to a comment from the moderator, Mr Sakurauchi – who was accompanying Mr Hashimoto – stated: “in regards to history books, the book of a person called Yoshimi was quoted, however this has already been shown to be fabricated, due to various pieces of evidence” (hereby “Sakurauchi statement.”)
3. The act of publicly declaring the research achievements of a researcher to be “fabricated” without any evidence is not only a serious defamation against the researcher, but something as serious as to potentially endanger even the life of the researcher. This Sakurauchi statement cannot be passed over, as it fundamentally denies the facts regarding the victimisation of “comfort women” which Professor Yoshimi has brought to light, and desecrates the honour and dignity of the victims.
4. Professor Yoshimi sought to claim for damages regarding the defamation of the Sakurauchi Statement. However, on January 20, 2016, the verdict of the Tokyo District Court (hereby “district court verdict”) ruled that the “fabrication” referred to in the Sakurauchi statement (with the meaning of “presenting something which is not fact as if it were fact”) referred just to the level of meaning “incorrect,” “unsuitable” or “a leap of logic,” finding the defendant exempt of liability.
Professor Yoshimi appealed this, however in the December 15, 2016 verdict of the Tokyo High Court (hereby, “high court verdict”), it was ruled that various interpretations of the word “this” within the Sakurauchi statement that “this has already been shown to be fabricated” were possible, and that it could not be certified to refer to “the book of a person called Yoshimi,” therefore that defamation was not established. The verdicts of both the district and high courts are distortions of interpretations of the Japanese language which could be easily understood by anyone, and are illogical.
5. Following the high court verdict, Professor Yoshimi submitted an appeal to the Supreme Court. In this appeal, the unjustness of the high court verdict was demonstrated to the Supreme Court, and a call made for a suitable decision. However, the decision of the Supreme Court must be said to have just turned the appeal away at the door.
6. Through his diligent resource research and interviews, Professor Yoshimi has greatly contributed to revealing the facts of the Japanese military “comfort women” more than any other scholar, and is greatly respected amongst history academia both within Japan and internationally. The fact that 15 history studies organizations, including The Japanese Historical Council, made statements in opposition to the district court verdict, demonstrates this (May 30, 2016). Furthermore, citizens from throughout Japan and globally joined our organisation, observed the court proceedings, participated in public events and launched an international petition calling for a fair verdict, in warm support of the Yoshimi Case.
7. The fact that the Supreme Court, Japan's highest judiciary body, made such an unfair verdict exposes the decline in Japan's judiciary. What kind of situation is it, where even there is impunity for making a statement calling the results of historical research “fabricated” without any facts? This verdict is a complete challenge against the history academe, and tramples upon the voices of citizens from Japan and around the world. Furthermore, it desecrates the honour and dignity of the “comfort women” survivors. This is not something which we can allow.
8. The district and high court verdicts, as well as the supreme court verdict, have not recognised Professor Yoshimi's research results as “fabricated.”
Furthermore, the Yoshimi case has developed debate regarding the facts by which the Japanese military “comfort women” system can be called sexual slavery, and confuted the debate on the side of Mr Sakurauchi. On the issue of whether the “comfort women” system was a system of sexual slavery, neither the district and high court verdicts, nor the supreme court verdict, has made any kind of ruling. Therefore, this does not mean that it has refuted the “comfort women” system being a system of sexual slavery.
That the “comfort women” system was a system of sexual slavery is held internationally as common knowledge, and is broadly recognised within the history studies academic world. Furthermore, it must also be noted that this case has brought more light to the historical facts of the “comfort women” issue.
9. We strongly protest the unjust ruling, and pledge to continue to work to restore the honour of Professor Yoshimi, and a true resolution of the Japanese military “comfort women” issue. We express our thanks to all who have supported the Yoshimi case, and call on you to continue to cooperate in activities towards a true resolution of the “comfort women” issue.
July 1, 2017
Yoshimi Saiban Issho ni Action
(Action Together for the Yoshimi Case)
(Action Together for the Yoshimi Case)
Legal Team Statement on the Supreme Court Verdict regarding the
Professor Yoshimi Yoshiaki Defamation Case【PDF】
1. On June 29, 0217, The Supreme Court First Petty Bench (Justice Koike Hiroshi) dismissed the appeal of Chuo University Professor Emeritus Yoshimi Yoshiaki against former House of Representatives Member Sakurauchi Fumiki (formerly of the Japan Restoration Party) for defamation, making the extremely unjust ruling that the court would not accept the hearing of appeal (hereby, “this verdict.”)
2. This case was the incident of Professor Yoshimi's honor being defamed through the statement made by Mr Sakurauchi when he was accompanying the then Mayor of Osaka Hashimoto Toru at a speech on the “comfort women” issue at the Foreign Correspondents' Club of Japan on May 27, 2013. Mr Sakurauchi stated, “in regards to history books, the book of a person called Yoshimi was quoted, however this has already been shown to be fabricated, due to various pieces of evidence” (hereby “this statement.”)
3. In the verdict of the Tokyo High Court (hereby “original verdict,”) it was ruled the “this” referred to in this statement could not be attributed to refer to “the book of a person called Yoshimi,” therefore that defamation was not established. This ignores both logic and the facts, and could be said to have led to the conclusion of the dismissal of the appeal.
The fact that the Supreme Court added no form of criticism regarding such an extremely unjust original verdict, and made its subsequent verdict, neglects the duty of legal jurisdiction given by the people, and we strongly oppose this.
The fact that the Supreme Court added no form of criticism regarding such an extremely unjust original verdict, and made its subsequent verdict, neglects the duty of legal jurisdiction given by the people, and we strongly oppose this.
4. Professor Yoshimi is an internationally renowned historical scholar of the Japanese military “comfort women” issue. His books are respected as verified research, based on multiple hustirocal resources and testimonies.
This verdict refers only to the judgment that it cannot be recognised that Mr Sakurauchi's statement referred to Professor Yoshimi's books, and makes no judgment regarding whether Professor Yoshimi's books contain any fabrication or not. Therefore, this has absolutely no impact on the evaluation of Professor Yoshimi's research achievements regarding the “comfort women” issue.
5. We strongly protest the unjust “fabrication” criticism of a researcher, and pledge to continue to work to protect and develop the academic research freedom of researchers, as well as to achieve a common and accurate understanding within society that the reality of victimisation of the “comfort women” is a human rights issue.
This verdict refers only to the judgment that it cannot be recognised that Mr Sakurauchi's statement referred to Professor Yoshimi's books, and makes no judgment regarding whether Professor Yoshimi's books contain any fabrication or not. Therefore, this has absolutely no impact on the evaluation of Professor Yoshimi's research achievements regarding the “comfort women” issue.
5. We strongly protest the unjust “fabrication” criticism of a researcher, and pledge to continue to work to protect and develop the academic research freedom of researchers, as well as to achieve a common and accurate understanding within society that the reality of victimisation of the “comfort women” is a human rights issue.
July 1, 2017
Legal Team for the Professor Yoshimi Yoshiaki Defamation Case
