UN Working Group on Business and Human Rights
Country Visit to Japan, 24 July to 4 August 2023
End of Mission Statement
Tokyo, 4 August 2023
Introduction
The United Nations Working Group on Business and Human Rights concluded today its
twelve-day visit to Japan. We thank the Government of Japan for the invitation to conduct thiscountry visit and its excellent cooperation in country and from its Permanent Mission in
Geneva. We are especially grateful for the open and constructive discussions that we have
had with officials of the Government, business community, civil society, industry associations,trade unions, workers, academia, lawyers, and other stakeholders who met with us to discuss
the progress, opportunities and challenges with the implementation of the UN Guiding
Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) in Japan.
During the visit, we met with the Special Advisor to the Prime Minister of Japan on Human
Rights, and the Ambassador for Human Rights and International Peace and Stability. We also
met with representatives of the following Government ministries, agencies and State bodies:
Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA); Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI); Ministryof Justice; IDE-JETRO; Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW); Cabinet Office;Consumer Affairs Agency; the National Contact Point (NCP); Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry
and Fisheries; Financial Services Agency; Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA);
Japan Bank for International Cooperation (JBIC); Ministry of Finance; and Ministry ofEnvironment (MoE). We met with local governments, including Osaka Prefectural Government
and the Japan Association for the 2025 World Exposition, the Tokyo Metropolitan
Government, and the City of Sapporo. In addition, the Working Group held meetings withmembers of the National Diet (Parliament).
During our meetings in Tokyo, Osaka, Aichi, Hokkaido, and Fukushima, we met with thefollowing businesses and private sector associations: Ajinomoto; Akao Nenshi K.K; Asahi
Group Holdings Ltd.; Fast Retailing / Uniqlo; Fuji Oil Group; Fujitsu; Global Compact Network
Japan; Johnny & Associates; Keidanren (Japanese Business Federation); Kirin Group;
McDonald’s; Mitsubishi Corporation; Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group; National Conference of
Association of Small Business Entrepreneurs; Rakuten; Sony Corporation; Suntory; Takase
Kanagata Molding Systems; Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO); and the Consumer
Goods Forum. We also met with representatives of civil society, including human rights
defenders, journalists, academics, workers, and trade unions. The Working Group also met
with international organizations operating in Japan, such as the International Labour
Organization.
In this final phase of the visit, we are pleased to share our preliminary observations. The
Working Group will submit a full report on its visit to Japan to the UN Human Rights Council
in June 2024.
General Context of Business and Human Rights in Japan
Japan became the second country in the Asia-Pacific region to develop a National Action Plan
(NAP) on Business and Human Rights in 2020 and released Guidelines on Respecting Human

1

Rights in Responsible Supply Chains in 2022. Against this backdrop, the Working Group’s
visit provided an opportunity for the Government to show its ongoing efforts and leadership in
promoting responsible business conduct at national, regional, and global levels.
State duty to protect human rights
We welcome the Government’s efforts in adopting a NAP. We also commend the Government
for ensuring that the development of the NAP followed a multi-stakeholder process by
establishing an advisory committee and working group to guide its implementation. However,
we observed a general lack of awareness of the UNGPs and the NAP, especially outside ofTokyo. The Government should take a leading role in conducting training and awarenessraising workshops on the UNGPs and the NAP.
There is a need to ensure that all relevant actors across all 47 prefectures, including
businesses and business associations, as well as trade unions, civil society, community
representatives, and human rights defenders, fully understand their human rights duties andresponsibilities under the UNGPs and the NAP. Thus far, these actors seem not to have been
fully engaged in the development of the NAP, with many stakeholders at the local levelindicating no awareness of the NAP’s existence. We also heard from diverse stakeholders
about how the lack of transparency vis-à-vis the status of the NAP has contributed to gaps inthe practical implementation of the UNGPs and, more broadly, in human rights protection in
the Japanese context.
The NAP mid-term review process thus provides an opportunity for the Government to fully
engage with all relevant stakeholders. The review should pay special attention to businessrelated human rights abuses experienced by marginalised communities such as migrant
workers, and strengthen access to remedy and corporate accountability in line with theWorking Group’s previous guidance on updating NAPs.1 The revised NAP should include a
gap analysis of business and human rights policies, identify priority issues, and clarify themodalities for implementation, including clear responsibilities of all relevant entities,
timeframes, and key performance indicators to monitor and evaluate success.
The Government should also make a continued and even stronger effort to ensure that Stateowned enterprises (SOEs), such as JBIC and TEPCO, are leading by example. This can
include measures such as requiring systematic and meaningful reporting on environment,social, and governance (ESG) factors that include human rights indicators and ensuring
victims’ access to remedy by, inter alia, requiring businesses’ full cooperation with judicial andnon-judicial grievance mechanisms, as well as the provision of effective remediation forabuses. The Working Group highlights its reports on SOEs and development financeinstitutions for further guidance. 2
The Working Group was pleased to learn of positive initiatives, such as the Ministry ofAgriculture, Forestry and Fisheries’ plans to develop human rights due diligence (HRDD)
guidelines for the food industry supply chain, and the Government’s work to raise awarenesson business and human rights overseas through, for example, its push for the inclusion of
relevant language in the G7 Hiroshima Leaders’ Communiqué and efforts to deepen
discussion on the UNGPs beyond the G7 countries.
Corporate responsibility to respect human rights
1
2

https://www.ohchr.org/en/documents/tools-and-resources/guidance-national-action-plans
A/HRC/32/45; A/HRC/53/24/Add.4
2

Throughout our consultations, the Working Group heard candid reflections from the business
community about the progress and challenges vis-à-vis the implementation of the UNGPs.
Business stakeholders reported positive practice developments, such as initiatives to provide
employees with continuous human rights education and the development of operational-levelgrievance mechanisms, including reporting hotlines. At the same time, they admitted thatconsiderable gaps remain in relation to a variety of issues, including the treatment of migrant
workers and technical interns, the karoshi culture of overwork, and their ability to monitor andreduce human rights risks in the upstream and downstream of their value chains.
In this context, the Working Group observed three fundamental issues. First, there are
significant gaps in understanding and in the implementation of the UNGPs among different
types of businesses. Discrepancies in awareness exist between large businesses, especiallytransnational corporations that have a fairly advanced comprehension of what is required ofbusinesses under the UNGPs, including regarding HRDD processes, and the country’s SMEs,
which constitute 99.7% of the total number of companies in Japan. Indeed, the low level ofawareness of the UNGPs among SMEs, including family-owned businesses, led many
stakeholders to underscore the need for the Government to provide tailored guidance andcapacity-building to SMEs. Noting the general need for a stronger civil society, as articulated
by stakeholders including businesses, the Working Group welcomed efforts made by the Cityof Sapporo and LGBTQI+ civil society to engage local SMEs in raising awareness about theimportance of SMEs in promoting an inclusive society, including through the Sapporo Rainbow
Pride event.
Further, private sector representatives spotlighted how more efforts were required toencourage the uptake of the UNGPs by other types of businesses, such as retailers andtrading companies, due to the central role they play in providing information to businesses andsecuring procurement. These players can use their leverage to encourage national brands
and suppliers along their value chains to apply the UNGPs.
Second, different stakeholders from the business community communicated to the Working
Group the need for the Government to be more active in discharging its duties under Pillar 1of the UNGPs. There was a general sentiment that the Government has been making
promising progress in the business and human rights area, with METI, MOFA, and MHLW,
among others, playing key roles in this regard. Even so, the Working Group observed how
some of the large Japanese businesses are ahead of the Government’s UNGPs-related
guidelines, with their human rights policies and grievance mechanisms pre-dating the releaseof the NAP. The Government should engage more with these businesses to build a common
understanding of positive practices and the challenges that remain.
Additionally, a clear demand was articulated by business representatives for more practicalguidance from the Government on exigent issues, ranging from how to conduct heightened
HRDD and responsible exit through to the regulation of value chains. Most businesses that
the Working Group met with indicated the desirability of mandatory HRDD, which can assist
with “levelling the playing field” among businesses and allow for greater alignment among theGovernment’s policies and standards. In the absence of more robust HRDD requirements, thebusiness community suggested that SMEs will have little incentive to adopt the UNGPs. It wasalso suggested that for the financial sector, there is a need for a legal basis to advance HRDD
practices and, as such, the Government needs to take action.
Finally, the need for timely, tailored and needs-driven capacity-building was a central message
conveyed to the Working Group by members of the business community. As indicated above,
they acknowledged the importance of Government involvement in this area alongside the3pivotal roles played by larger businesses and civil society in contributing to UNGPs-related
awareness-raising and training in their business relationships. Some stakeholders noted, forexample, the growing demand for auditor training on human rights as well as guidance on how
SMEs can conduct stakeholder engagement better. In this sense, the Working Grouphighlights its report on capacity-building.3
Access to remedy
State-based judicial mechanisms
During our visit, the Working Group identified salient areas of concern regarding access tojustice and effective remedy, including obstacles to accessing courts in Japan. One criticalissue we observed is the low awareness of judges about the UNGPs and broader humanrights issues in the context of business activities, such as those concerning LGBTQI+ persons.
To address this, we strongly recommend implementing mandatory human rights training forjudges and lawyers, including training on the UNGPs. We also heard from stakeholders how
lengthy court proceedings can hinder access to remedy. We received testimonies that there
are cases where plaintiffs do not receive adequate financial or other forms of compensation,
due to a lack of adequate sanctions and application of court decisions.
We welcome the Japan Legal Support Center, established in 2006 and funded by theGovernment, which provides legal services free of charge to non-Japanese and Japanese
residents with limited financial resources. The Government should increase the visibility of thisprogram, particularly among the most marginalized groups, to enhance access to justice. In
addition, we also heard of initiatives by the Ministry of Justice to facilitate access to remedy,
including human rights promotion and protection activities to raise awareness about humanrights, and the digitalisation of civil proceedings.
State-based non-judicial grievance mechanisms
National human rights institutions (NHRIs) play a crucial role in enhancing remediation
processes in cases of business-related human rights abuses, and in promoting business andhuman rights training for business actors, auditors, judges, and public defenders. 4 The
Working Group is deeply concerned by the lack of a dedicated NHRI in Japan which, as raisedby many stakeholders, creates a major gap in Government efforts to promote respect ofhuman rights by businesses and corporate accountability.
The Working Group urges the Government to establish a robust and independent NHRI in linewith the Principles Relating to the Status of National Human Rights Institutions ( or Paris
Principles). The NHRI should be equipped with an explicit mandate to deal with businessrelated human rights abuses, and enough resources and powers, including to provide civil
remedies, raise awareness, build capacity on business and human rights, and protect humanrights defenders. The NHRI should also develop close collaboration with NHRIs of othercountries and the National Contact Point (NCP) of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation
and Development (OECD).
Japan established its NCP under the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises on
Responsible Business Conduct (OECD Guidelines) in 2000, with the explicit mandate tohandle disputes related to business and human rights and, more generally, on responsible
business conduct. However, many stakeholders underscored that the NCP lacks visibility and

3
4

A/HRC/53/24
A/HRC/47/39/Add.3
4

impact. With only fourteen cases taken up in its twenty-three years of existence, more steps
are needed to enhance the visibility, institutional capacity, and expertise of the NCP to provide
effective remedial outcomes. It is also critical that the NCP is seen to be independent andcredible by all stakeholders. The NCP should consider developing awareness-raising tools
about the OECD Guidelines as well as its mandate, including in languages spoken by migrant
workers and affected stakeholders in overseas jurisdictions.
Non-State-based grievance mechanisms
In addressing key business and human rights issues in Japan, the Working Group emphasises
the importance of effective non-State based grievance mechanisms. While most of the large
businesses that the Working Group spoke with had operational grievance mechanisms inplace, some stakeholders expressed fear of reprisals (such as losing their jobs) from reporting
workplace misconduct. The Whistleblower Protection Act obliging businesses to establish asystem for internal whistleblowing disclosures is a positive step in the right direction.
The Working Group reiterates that businesses should provide effective grievance mechanisms
for rights holders, in accordance with the UNGPs (Principle 31). Some good practices weobserved include establishing grievance mechanisms open to all stakeholders, or setting up
dedicated grievance mechanisms for the value chain. The Engagement and Remedy Platformby the Japan Center for Engagement and Remedy on Business and Human Rights (JaCER)
is a notable example, fostering “know-how” accumulation and offering a non-judicial platform
for its members to achieve grievance redress based on the UNGPs.
The Working Group was pleased to learn about some State agencies’ grievance reporting
hotlines and commends the establishment of Japan Platform for Migrant Workers towards
Responsible and Inclusive Society (JP Mirai), which includes a grievance mechanism
available to all migrant workers. The mechanism is available in nine languages and provides
expert consultation services. We encourage JP Mirai to continue efforts to increase its visibility
and build trust among Japan’s migrant worker communities.
Stakeholder Groups and Issue-Areas of Interest
The Working Group was informed by different stakeholders about business-related humanrights concerns across a variety of sectors, ranging in levels of severity as well as publicawareness. For this Statement, the Working Group focuses its preliminary assessment on thefollowing thematic issue-areas, which were discussed at length in our consultations: diversity
and inclusion, discrimination and harassment (including hate speech), labor-related abuses,
Indigenous Peoples’ rights, regulation of value chains, as well as impacts on the right to health,
the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment, and on climate change.
Challenges were particularly evident in relation to women, LGBTQI+, persons with disabilities,
Buraku communities, Indigenous Peoples and ethnic minorities, technical interns and migrant
workers, workers and trade unions, as well as children and youths. It is important to stress,
however, that this is not an exhaustive list. The Working Group was also informed about issues
pertaining to the exploitation of sex workers and discrimination against homeless people, forinstance.
At-risk stakeholder groups
Women
We note with concern Japan’s persistent gender wage gap, with full-time female workers
earning only 75.7% of their male counterparts’ wages. Considering Japan’s low gender gap
index ranking at 125 th out of 146 countries in 2023, it is imperative that the Government and5businesses collaborate to narrow this disparity. The prevalence of part-time work contracts
among women, which account for 68.2% of all the non-regular workers,5 further reflects
gender disparities in the Japanese workforce, as non-regular female workers earn only 80.4%of their male counterparts. We commend the Government’s recent requirement for large
companies to disclose their gender wage gaps;6 however, it is vital to expand the scope of thisinitiative and ensure comprehensive efforts for equal pay and opportunities for all workers,
irrespective of gender and sexual orientation.
Further, while noting the adoption of the 2018 Act on the Promotion of Gender Equality in the
Political Field and the approval of the Fifth Basic Plan for Gender Equality, theunderrepresentation of women in executive management—women comprise just 15.5% of
employed people—remains a concerning trend that demands greater attention from theGovernment and the private sector. Reports of women being denied promotions and worrying
cases of sexual harassment highlight the need for promoting gender diversity in leadershipand decision-making roles. Robust measures must be enforced by the Government andimplemented by businesses to combat sexism and create safe and respectful workplaces.
LGBTQI+
We acknowledge the Government’s recent enactment of a law to promote understanding of
LGBTQI+ people. While there have been other encouraging developments, such as theSupreme Court’s recent ruling on restroom access for transgender individuals and anincreasing number of local governments implementing partnership systems for same-sex
couples, major challenges persist. Throughout our visit, we were informed on multiple
occasions of instances of discrimination against LGBTQI+ persons. Worrisome workplace
practices, such as demanding transgender individuals to disclose their legal names and pretransition photos on job applications, further underline the need for comprehensive nondiscrimination legislation to effectively safeguard the rights of LGBTQI+ persons.
One emerging positive practice observed during our visit to the City of Sapporo was its LGBTFriendliness Index System, which evaluates and registers companies promoting LGBTfriendly initiatives based on specific indicators. Although public awareness of the systemremains limited, it represents an important step towards greater inclusion, and the Working
Group encourages other cities in Japan to adopt similar measures to encourage corporate
initiatives that support LGBTQI+ persons and respect their rights.
Persons with disabilities
One of the pressing challenges in Japan is the inclusion of persons with disabilities in thelabour market and workplace. The Act for the Promotion of Employment for Persons with
Disabilities sets, among others, legal employment quota rates for persons with disabilities; thelegal quota for the private sector is 2.3%, and for State entities it is 2.6%. National statistics
indicate an actual employment rate of persons with disabilities respectively at 2.25% and at
2.85% in the State.7 This demonstrates that there is room for further improvement, given thatthe total percentage of people with disabilities in the population is 7%. The Working Groupalso heard with concern the experiences of persons with disabilities who are exposed toworkplace discrimination, lower salaries, and difficulties with accessing adequate support
through the assistance system.

5

https://www.gender.go.jp/kaigi/senmon/keikaku_kanshi/siryo/pdf/ka22-1.pdf
Through the 2022 revisions to the Ministerial Ordinance of the Act on Promotion of Women's Participation
and Advancement in the Workplace.
7
https://www.mhlw.go.jp/content/001027403.pdf
66

We encourage the Government to follow up on the recommendations made by the UN
Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, with respect to ensuring accessible
workplaces and providing comprehensive training to employers on respecting andimplementing individualised support and reasonable accommodations. To ensure equal
opportunities for all and “leave no one behind”, it is crucial for the Government and businesses
to recognise and address the intersectionality of gender, race, sexual orientation, anddisability. The Government of Japan must also ensure accessibility for persons with disabilities
in official documents, such as the National Action Plan, to promote their full inclusion andparticipation in society.
Indigenous Peoples
The recognition of the Ainu people as Indigenous People s, together with the passing of the
Ainu Measures Promotion Act of 2019, with the aim of safeguarding and revitalising theirculture and heritage, marks a positive move towards acknowledging their rights. However, theabsence of a census of the Ainu population renders their discrimination invisible anduncounted, with Indigenous Ainu People still facing discrimination in education and theworkplace, necessitating measures to ensure their rights without discrimination and equal
opportunities.
Noting the Government’s efforts to promote cultural education about the Ainu people throughtourism for example, the Working Group is concerned about reports received of racial
harassment and psychological stress faced by Ainu workers at the National Ainu Museum andPark (Upopoy). Furthermore, we were informed that Article 28 of the Law for the Protection ofFisheries Resource prohibits, with limited exceptions, the harvesting of freshwater salmon by
all Japanese, including the Ainu people, without due consideration of their fishing rights as
Indigenous Peoples. We have also been informed that the free, prior, and informed consent(FPIC) of the Ainu people was not obtained for various development projects, including thosein the renewable energy sector, and note with concern the adverse impacts of projects on the
Ainu people and their rights.
To uphold the Ainu people’s rights, ensuring FPIC by the Government and businesses isessential, as outlined in the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Pe oples. We urge theGovernment to recognise Ainu collective rights, including to lands and natural resources.
Buraku communities
The Working Group learned about human rights issues surrounding Buraku people, also
referred to as Dowa. While Japan approved the Act on the Promotion of Elimination of Buraku
Discrimination (Act No. 109 of 2016), the Working Group learned of a pattern of hate speech(particularly online and in the publishing industry) and workplace discrimination (for example,
through job screening questionnaires). While some successfully won lawsuits against
discrimination, the Working Group was alerted to how Japan’s long court proceedings make it
difficult to access remedy. The Working Group also learned of positive practices, which include
coordination committees comprised of businesses that work with affected stakeholders to
reduce discrimination through, for instance, providing training programs to employees. Other
examples include initiatives by local governments to raise awareness and fight discrimination,
the MOJ’s consultation channels, and the MHLW’s guidance to establish a human rights focal
point for businesses with 80 or more employees. As indicated by the fair recruitment andselection human rights awareness promoter scheme, employers are required to ensure “fairrecruitment selection based on the understanding and recognition of human rights issues,
such as Dowa issues”.8
8

https://kouseisaiyou.mhlw.go.jp/system.html
7

Trade unions
The Working Group observed positive practices among the labour unions in Japan that
support foreign technical workers. However, we remain concerned about the difficulties inunionising, barriers to freedom of assembly including the organisation of strikes acrossdifferent sectors, as well as instances of arrests and prosecution of union members.
Thematic Areas
Health, climate change, and the natural environment
During our visit, the Working Group observed that among many stakeholders, awareness of
the link between the impact of business activities on human rights, including the rights to healthand to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment is still weak. We are also concerned that
the Government and businesses are not doing enough to ensure a transition to a zero -carbon
economy. We call on these stakeholders to step up their efforts to address climate change,
and to keep in mind human rights considerations for a just transition, especially in the sourcingof transition minerals.
The Working Group welcomes the MOE’s environmental due diligence initiatives, such as theIntroductory Guide on Environmental Due Diligence along the Value Chain, which includes
reference to the UNGPs and human rights. Some businesses are also taking promising steps
by, for example, establishing supplier codes that include human rights and environmental due
diligence considerations. But despite these developments, there remains a lack ofGovernment mechanisms to address stakeholders’ concerns about environmental issues,particularly when it comes to Indigenous Peoples.
The Working Group met with several stakeholder groups affected by the Fukushima Daiichi
nuclear disaster. The Working Group learned that TEPCO has recently established a humanrights policy, a procedure for human rights due diligence, and a grievance mechanism.
However, affected stakeholders reported concerning labour practices in relation to the cleanup and decontamination effort, and the decommissioning of the power station. The Working
Group listened with deep concern about instances of forced labour, predatory subcontracting
practices, and unsafe working conditions. We also heard about the issues faced by hospital
workers and schoolteachers in the aftermath of the disaster, highlighting the need for remedy
for all stakeholders affected.
In terms of forced labour, the Working Group heard that some workers of TEPCO’s
subcontractors were reportedly forced to work on the decontamination and thedecommissioning of the nuclear power station to pay off debts. We also heard that while theuse of multiple subcontractors was banned on paper; in reality, TEPCO had subcontractors
going down to Tier 5, which meant that workers on lower tiers of the subcontracting ladder
received lower wages for performing the same job. Other workers were promised certain
wages and hazard pay, but once they were on the job were informed that they would be paid
much less. We also heard from workers whose colleagues died from heat stroke and otherworkplace accidents. Further, we heard that workers were afraid to speak up, as those who
voiced concerns were often dismissed, despite TEPCO’s grievance mechanism. The Working
Group was concerned to learn about workers who had developed cancer-related illnesses
after their clean-up and decontamination work but were denied financial compensation or
medical assistance by TEPCO’s subcontractors, as employment records did not indicate
exposure to radiation.
The Government and TEPCO should recognise the heroic efforts of all of those involved in
the clean-up efforts following the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster, take concrete steps toreduce the multiple subcontracting structure, ensure that workers are properly andretroactively compensated, and recognise workers’ health concerns as work-related illnesses.
8In addition to operational health and safety issues related to the disaster, we repeatedly heard
concerns about the discharge of treated water from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power
Station. We call on the Government to fulfil the right to information by making all data related
to the treatment of the water publicly available, in particular information about the absoluteamount of nuclear material in the water.
The Working Group also heard several cases of water contaminated with per- andpolyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in Tokyo, Osaka, Okinawa, and Aichi. Concerned
stakeholders indicated that neither the local nor national Governments are tak ing sufficient
steps to address the presence of these “forever chemicals” in the water supply, and call forwater and soil sampling, and monitoring on the impacts on the right to health. We would liketo highlight the responsibility of the businesses involved to address this issue, as required
under the UNGPs and the “polluter pays” principle.
Technical intern training programme and migrant workers
The Working Group met with foreign workers under the Technical Intern Training Programme(TITP) and their employers, and with large companies whose value chains include the use of
TITP workers. TITP workers were the second largest category of foreigners in Japan in 2022.
Most of them come from Asian countries such as Vietnam, China, the Philippines, andMyanmar. While the purpose of the TITP is supposed to be human resource development,these workers also play a key role in addressing the labour shortage in Japan.
Despite this, foreign workers in Japan are in high-risk situations and have difficulty accessing
information, as a result of the language and mediums through which the information is shared,
and comprehending cumbersome application processes. During our visit, we heard cases offoreign workers being fired after suffering from workplace accidents (and thus having theirtreatment discontinued); of their cramped living conditions; of the payment of exorbitant feesto agencies in workers’ home States; and of workers performing the same duties for lower
wages than their Japanese counterparts. At the same time, the Working Group learned ofsome positive practices, for example of recipient unions that assist workers to understand theirrights and act as grievance mechanisms. The Working Group also heard of the work that SME
associations are doing to encourage responsible hiring practices and management, and how
several large businesses have supplier codes of conduct which forbid recruitment fees forforeign technical workers and require their suppliers to repay the fees to employees.
The Working Group understands that the Government is aware of many of the human rights
issues surrounding the TITP, which is currently under review by an expert panel. We expect
the Government to include explicit human rights protections in this revision, including working
with home States to abolish recruitment fees, simplifying the application system, increasing
flexibility for trainees to switch jobs, and to ensure the enforcement of equal wages for equal
work as required under Japanese law.
Finally, we heard cases of discrimination against ethnic Korean and Chinese workers,
including repeated instances of hate speech by employers. Case s filed by certain victims
relating to hate speech took many years to go through the Japanese court system; andaccording to testimonies received, even when the plaintiffs won, there was no financial
compensation, hindering access to remedy.
Media and entertainment industry
The Working Group observed deeply troubling issues within the media and entertainment
industry. The industry’s exploitative working conditions, along with the lack of labour law
protection for workers and a clear legal definition of harassment, foster a culture of impunity
for sexual violence and harassment. We were informed, for example, about the sexual

9harassment and abuse of female journalists and the lack of remedial action taken bybroadcasting stations. We were also alerted to excessively long working hours and issues
related to unfair subcontracting relationships in the animation sector, with creators often given
contracts that inadequately protect their intellectual property rights.
Our interactions with victims of sexual harassment involving Johnny and Associates talents
have exposed deeply alarming allegations of sexual exploitation and abuse involving several
hundreds of the company’s talents, with media companies in Japan reportedly implicated incovering up the scandal for decades. We note that several measures have been taken by theGovernment over the last 20 years in relation to the prevention of child sexual abuse.
However, the perceived inaction by the Government and the business involved among victims
that we met in this case highlights the need for the Government, as the primary duty-bearer,
to ensure transparent investigations of perpetrators and that victims obtain effective remedies,
be they in the form of an apology or financial compensation. According to testimony received,
doubts persist about the transparency and legitimacy of Johnny and Associates’ Special Team(or Independent Team) for investigation. We have received reports of the lack of response to
victims seeking mental health consultations from Johnny and Associates’ Mental Care
Consultation Desk. To comply with the UNGPs, all media and entertainment businesses must
facilitate access to remedy, ensure a legitimate and transparent grievance mechanism, andestablish a clear and predictable timeframe for investigations. We urge all Japanesebusinesses, especially but not only in this industry, to proactively conduct HRDD to identify
and address abuse.
Conclusions
Advancing the implementation of UNGPs in Japan is critical not only for consolidating thecountry’s reputation as a leader in the business and human rights agenda regionally andglobally, but also to enhancing the positive human rights impacts and competitiveness ofJapanese businesses at home and overseas. The Working Group commends the ongoing
efforts of the Government, businesses, and civil society to build capacity and awareness on
the UNGPs and the NAP.
Even so, the Working Group remains concerned that systemic human rights challenges inJapan are not being sufficiently tackled as part of State and private sector initiatives in thebusiness and human rights space. There is an urgent need to fully dismantle structures ofinequality and discrimination against at-risk groups, such as women, persons with disabilities,
Indigenous Peoples, Buraku communities, technical interns, migrant workers, and theLGBTQI+ persons. Problematic social norms and gender stereotypes that perpetuate power
harassment should be fully addressed. The Government should ensure transparent
investigations and effective remedies for victims of business-related human rights abuses in
all industries. We call for the establishment of an independent NHRI in Japan to better promote
access to effective remedy and corporate accountability.
There is a clear need to further the business and human rights agenda in Japan and,specifically, for implementation of the UNGPs to be fully realised. The Working Group thanks
the Government of Japan, once again, for the invitation to carry out this visit and thewillingness of all stakeholders, including the local governments of Tokyo, Osaka and Sapporo,to share their insights during our consultations. The Working Group will continue to collectinformation over the coming months, as we develop our full report to be presented to the
Human Rights Council in June 2024. That report will contain concrete recommendations for
the Government and businesses, as well as other stakeholders, to support efforts to enhanceprotection and respect of human rights in the context of business activities in Japan.

10