Subcommittee on Guarantee of Fundamental Human Rights (Fifth Meeting)

Thursday, July 4, 2002

Meeting Agenda

Matters concerning the guarantee of fundamental human rights

After a statement was heard from Mr. KUSANO Tadayoshi concerning the above matters, questions were put to him; this was followed by discussion among the members.

Informant

  • KUSANO Tadayoshi, General Secretary, RENGO or Japanese Trade Union Confederation

Members who put questions to Mr. KUSANO


Main points of Mr. KUSANO's statement

1. Fundamental labor rights

>> Even though Article 28 of the Constitution provides for the rights to organize, to bargain collectively, and to strike, there has been a ban on strikes by public employees since the time when the Constitution was enacted. The government has carried out various reforms of the public service personnel system, but it has taken no steps to remove this restriction on fundamental labor rights.

>> RENGO has filed a complaint with the International Labour Organization (ILO) on this issue of the fundamental labor rights of Japan's public employees, and the government's policy is drawing international criticism.

2. Measures concerned with employment

>> Article 27, Paragraph 1 of the Constitution is interpreted as obligating the government to: (a) create a structure which enables the nation to have full employment; (b) provide job opportunities for the unemployed; and (c) pay a living allowance to the unemployed. In my view, policies that violate these obligations are unconstitutional.

>> For example, I consider that the government's failure to increase national treasury funding of the unemployment insurance system, which has become difficult to maintain due to the recession and rising unemployment, is contrary to the intent of the Constitution.

3. Labor conditions

(a) Gender equality issues
>> Because women are often employed part-time in order to cut costs, there is a growing disparity between men's and women's wages. This inequality could be said to violate the intent of the Constitution.

(b) Karoshi (sudden death from overwork), bullying, sexual harassment, and other workplace issues
>> Issues such as karoshi (death from overwork), workplace bullying and sexual harassment involve more than labor conditions; they are questions of human dignity and the right to live. Improved legislation is needed to prevent and prohibit these abuses.

4. Adequate provision for the right to work and social rights

(a) The importance of examining the right to work and social rights
>> It is debatable whether the existing constitutional provisions on the right to work and social rights are adequate in today's society. I hope that the Research Commission on the Constitution will discuss these questions fully in future.

(b) Several points at issue
>> With regard to promoting employment, there is a need for debate on making explicit provisions in the Constitution concerning such areas as the state's obligation to promote employment, and development of workers' abilities.

>> With regard to the provisions on labor conditions, debate is needed in such areas as making explicit provision for gender equality, and providing a basis for extending the Constitution's guarantee of human rights to private relationships such as those between labor and management. There should also be debate on banning the exploitation of children more strongly.

>> With regard to the provisions on social rights, as economic globalization is expected to lead to greater social inequality, there is a need for debate on making clearer provision in Article 25 for measures to assist the socially disadvantaged.

(c) The debate at the time of enactment of the Constitution
>> The existing Constitution's extensive provisions for social rights incorporated views put forward by the Socialist Party of Japan and the Cooperative Democratic Party during the Diet deliberations prior to its enactment. I believe that the debate that took place at that time will serve as a valuable reference for the examination of social rights.


Main points of questions and comments to Mr. KUSANO

ISHIBA Shigeru (Liberal Democratic Party)

>> I think that a situation exists in which the employment of foreign workers conflicts with the rights of Japanese workers. What are your views in this regard?

>> Some labor unions oppose the measure, proposed as part of emergency-response legislation, whereby medical personnel and workers in the construction and transportation industries can be ordered to perform certain duties (Article 103 of the Self-Defense Forces Law), on the grounds that this constitutes "bondage" or "servitude" under Article 18 of the Constitution. But isn't this position inconsistent with the clause of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which Japan has ratified, that states "'forced or compulsory labor' shall not include: . . . any service exacted in cases of emergency or calamity . . . "?


KOBAYASHI Kenji (Democratic Party of Japan and Club of Independents)

>> You take issue with the fact that public employees do not have the right to strike, but these days strikes are very rare in the private sector, and only a small proportion of public employees are unionized. In view of these facts, isn't it true that government employees' campaign for the right to strike will fail to win public sympathy?

>> In the current severe economic climate, while legislative measures to facilitate corporate reorganization, such as the Civil Rehabilitation Law, are going ahead, it seems to me that not enough is being done to legislate protection for workers' rights during the restructuring process. What are your views on this point?


OTA Akihiro (New Komeito)

>> I believe that Articles 27 and 28 of the Constitution should stand as they are. What is your view in this regard?

>> In the "Guidelines for Reform of the Public Servant System" approved by Cabinet on December 25, 2001, there seems to be a move toward reducing the role of the National Personnel Authority. How do you view the relationship between this move and public employees' right to strike?

>> At present, particularly serious problems are posed both by young people who do not take permanent jobs and by middle-aged and older people who want jobs but cannot find them. In the case of young people, some commentators think that employers are partly to blame as they are not offering young people meaningful work. What is RENGO's view regarding this question of jobs for young people?


TAKEYAMA Yuriko (Liberal Party)

>> How do you view the fact that Japan has not ratified ILO Convention No. 111, concerning discrimination in respect of employment and occupation?

>> The tax concession for housewives who work part-time has the effect of discouraging them from working as much as they might wish. I believe that it is desirable for housewives to work and to pay taxes. What is your view of this?

>> In Japan, there are not enough suitable jobs for the growing number of people who want to work part-time. What forms of "Japanese-style work sharing" are possible to deal with this situation?


HARUNA Naoaki (Japanese Communist Party)

>> I think that the provisions on the right to work, the three labor rights, and related concerns arose out of critical reflection on the harsh labor conditions that prevailed in the prewar years. How do you view the significance of these provisions?

>> I believe that the recent "deregulation" of labor legislation, such as the relaxing of restrictions on temporary staff agencies and fixed-term labor contracts, has been a response to demand by business. How do you view these changes in the labor laws?

>> In the present harsh economic climate, I believe that the Constitution requires us to promote economic recovery while protecting the rights of workers, for example, by setting a legal limit to overtime hours and enacting a law to regulate dismissal. Do you agree?


KANEKO Tetsuo (Social Democratic Party)

>> I believe that the fundamental labor rights of Japan's public employees are not adequately guaranteed, and that the need to improve this situation is one reason why we should ratify ILO Convention No. 151 concerning protection of the right to organize in the public service. What are your views in this regard?

>> Article 98, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution can be interpreted as meaning that treaties which Japan has ratified, including ILO Convention No. 87 (concerning the freedom of association and protection of the right to organize), have the same force as domestic law. Thus, I think that questions of this kind could be brought before the domestic courts. Do you agree?

>> The recent "Guidelines for Reform of the Public Servant System" takes up the system of National Personnel Authority recommendations but does not address the restriction of public employees' fundamental labor rights. As a result, isn't there a risk that these rights of public employees will be restricted even further?


INOUE Kiichi (New Conservative Party)

>> I would argue that the system of National Personnel Authority recommendations is functioning as it should to compensate for the restriction of public employees' fundamental labor rights, and also that there is de facto recognition of public employees' right to collective bargaining, and hence there is nothing wrong with the present system. Would you like to comment?

>> What are your views on establishing provisions relating to employment in the Constitution?

>> In the event that the law relating to dismissal is improved, are there other matters that should be covered besides the "four conditions for dismissal during restructuring," which are based on judicial precedent?

>> Should the introduction of "work sharing" be provided for by law, or should it be left to labor-management negotiations?


KONDO Motohiko (Liberal Democratic Party)

>> What are your views on enacting a national referendum law in order to put in place the required procedure for amending the Constitution?

>> In present-day society, I think that there are several labor-related issues that transcend labor-management relations; for example, relationships between large corporations and their subcontractors, or between labor unions and NPOs. What consideration is being given to these issues?

>> I suggest that it is not appropriate to give government employees the right to strike because of the nature of their role as public servants, and because failure to perform public duties has a serious impact on the national life. Would you like to comment?

OIDE Akira (Democratic Party of Japan and Club of Independents)

>> What part did public employees' organizations play in the process of adopting the "Guidelines for Reform of the Public Servant System"?

>> In light of Article 28 of the Constitution, should it not be a general principle that public employees, like other workers, are guaranteed the fundamental labor rights?


HIRAI Takuya (Liberal Democratic Party)

>> I believe that, while it is appropriate to discuss the fundamental labor rights of public employees, at the same time it is also appropriate to have a mechanism for restructuring and scaling back labor conditions in order to eliminate wasteful bureaucratic practices and reduce administrative costs. What are your views in this regard?

>> What are your views on establishing "special employment zones" with relaxed restrictions on employment agencies in regions with high unemployment?

>> It can be argued that layoffs of middle-aged and older workers have an aspect of helping create jobs for young people, and that therefore it is better to relax the restrictions on dismissal. What are your views in this regard?


Main points of comments made by members of the Subcommittee (in order of presentation)

TSUCHIYA Shinako (Liberal Democratic Party)

>> Human rights have to do with the rights of individuals viewed in isolation, but, at the same time, individuals are also members of a group, that is, the nation. In this connection, the fact that there were signs of an emerging national consciousness as the Japanese supported their national soccer team in the World Cup was highly significant.

>> We should change the provisions of the Constitution in keeping with the times while thinking about what form human rights should take from the standpoint of the individual.


HARUNA Naoaki (Japanese Communist Party)

>> The Constitution's explicit provisions on the right to work and fundamental labor rights (Articles 27 and 28) were pioneering, and they can also serve as guidelines for the future. However, from the postwar years to the present day, the government has consistently reduced these basic principles of labor legislation to an empty shell.

>> In future, guided by these constitutional provisions, we should address such issues as enacting a law regulating dismissals, setting a legal limit to overtime hours, eliminating unpaid overtime, and guaranteeing the fundamental labor rights of public employees.


KANEKO Tetsuo (Social Democratic Party)

>> Public employees are workers too, and we should recognize the fundamental labor rights guaranteed to them by the Constitution. The omission of this question from the recent "Guidelines for Reform of the Public Servant System" is highly problematic.

>> In light of the current severe economic conditions, we should consider increasing national treasury funding of the unemployment insurance system in order to provide a fuller guarantee of the right to work.


NAKAYAMA Taro, Chairman of the Commission (Liberal Democratic Party)

>> Given the likelihood of a future increase in the number of refugees, there is a need for debate on how to treat the human rights of foreign residents, including refugees accepted under the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees.


KONNO Azuma (Democratic Party of Japan and Club of Independents)

>> In thinking about human rights, it is important to listen to those who cannot easily make their voices heard, such as those who are not organized and those who are in the minority in organizations.

>> The Constitution sets forth ideals, and it is the province of laws to make these ideals concrete. Thus, it is a fallacy to cite matters that can be adequately provided for by legislation as evidence that the Constitution is imperfect.