Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality.
Log in
- Convenor:
-
Ian Neary
(Nissan Institute Oxford University)
Send message to Convenor
- Stream:
- Politics and International Relations
- Location:
- Torre A, Piso 0, Sala 05
- Start time:
- 31 August, 2017 at
Time zone: Europe/Lisbon
- Session slots:
- 1
Short Abstract:
The panel will consist of hree substantive papers that consider the different levels of significance of this legislation from the perspectives of historian, sociologist and polit.ical scientist
Long Abstract:
This is the most significant development in policy towards Buraku discrimination since 1996 and may even represent a new stage in the development of Japan's human rights policy more generally. It is an unexpected policy initiative and does not obviously fit in to the rest of the 'shift to the right' agenda visible in other dimensions of the LDP domestic policy under PM Abe.
The aim of the panel is to consider the significance of this piece of domestic policymaking from a number of different disciplinary dimensions. The session will begin with a brief - 5-10 minute - introductory description of the policymaking process from the proposals made by the Wakayama BLL, their endorsement by LDP policy chief Inada Tomomi to submission to the Diet in 2016 and initial implementation in 2017. This will be followed by a description of the other legal initiatives that were taken in the course of 2016 - on disability, to promote female employment, to restrict 'hate speech' and to improve the working conditions of some types of migrant workers. Does this suggest the Japanese state is taking rights seriously, or something else?
New Law or Old Issues: Stakeholder expectations on the Bill for the Promotion of the Elimination of Buraku Discrimination,
Christopher Bondy, Associate Professor of Sociology, International Christian University, Tokyo
The JCP and the new Law,
Professor Timothy Amos, University of Singapore
Accepted papers:
Session 1Christopher Bondy (International Christian University)
Paper short abstract:
This paper will illuminate how different activists and lawmakers view the goals of the Bill for the Promotion of the Elimination of Buraku Discrimination, the desired outcome and what they ultimately expect to see the bill do for buraku issues throughout the country.
Paper long abstract:
As is often the case with public policy laws, the challenges come in interpreting the difference between the national law and the local implementation. Noticeable in the wording in the Bill for the Promotion of the Elimination of Buraku Discrimination is the stipulation that the state works with local governments based on the needs of their respective communities. While this aspirational approach is laudable, it also gives one pause. This law was presented as a measure to end buraku discrimination, yet because it does not provide a statement on universal policies, it leaves implementation policies at the discretion of local communities. As such, there is the potential for a vast difference in understanding, implementation, and response based in different parts of the country. Indeed, some local governments may not even make use of these policies at all. This was the case with the long-standing Dōwa Laws, which resulted in uneven outcomes. To explore how this new law and its relationship with the earlier Dōwa Laws, this paper draws on interviews with various stakeholders, including lawmakers and social movement activists. In particular, I will investigate the responses to the proposed law by various activists, ranging from members of the largest buraku social movement group, the Buraku Liberation League, young activists who are intentionally not connected with the "older generation movements." In so doing, I will illuminate how different activists and lawmakers view the goals of the law, the desired outcome and what they ultimately expect to see the bill do for buraku issues throughout the country.
Timothy Amos (National University of Singapore)
Paper short abstract:
This paper argues that while Japan Communist Party and linked opposition to the New Law is rooted in historical interpretative conflicts surrounding the nature of Buraku discrimination, a study of organizational contestations of the law reveal significant shifts in liberation movement politics.
Paper long abstract:
On May 19 2016, Toshihiro Nakai, Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) politician and member of the Lower House, along with eight other politicians, submitted the Bill for the Promotion of the Elimination of Buraku Discrimination to the Committee for Judicial Affairs. The same day, Tadashi Shimizu, Japan Communist Party (JCP) politician and also member of the Lower House, condemned the Bill in an Akahata (Red Flag) article, calling it legislation that would "cement" (koteika) and "perpetuate" (eikyūka) Buraku discrimination. Shimizu repeated these criticisms when the Bill was presented to the Lower House for debate on June 1, resulting in its temporary shelving. On August 14 the Zenkoku chi'iki jinken undō sōrengō (National Confederation of Human Rights Movements in the Community) convened an emergency meeting in Kobe to discuss further strategies for combatting the Bill. The activism of this group, which was established after the dissolution of the Zenkoku Buraku Kaihō Undō Rengōkai (National Buraku Liberation Alliance) in 2004, highlights important continuities in the postwar internal political struggles within the Buraku liberation movement.
The processes and debates surrounding the drafting of the Bill for the Promotion of the Elimination of Buraku Discrimination also hint at important differences between past and present forms of legislative activism. In the postwar period, interpretative conflicts, particularly centering on understandings of the nature of discrimination and the desirability of state intervention, led to controversial splits within the liberation movement, particularly on the left. Buraku liberation organizations vying for political influence and legal reform were until recently usually clearly labelled and their political affiliations and institutional allegiances reasonably transparent. The 2016 Anti-Buraku discrimination bill, however, was introduced by an LDP politician and his bipartisan supporters, and an "alliance" with a Buraku liberation lineage but considerably different membership resists the bill for complex reasons. Such changes suggest the emergence of a new era of Buraku liberation politics marked by shifting motivations, allegiances and fault lines and shaped by disparate visions surrounding the desirability of state enforcement of human rights within an increasingly globally demarcated order of distributive justice.