2022 年 10 月 10 日国連自由権規約委員会・公式ブリーフィングで婚外子差別の現状を訴える

なくそう戸籍と婚外子差別・交流会

4 分発言用日本文

私たちのもとには、婚外⼦本⼈から次のような悲痛な叫びが寄せられています。
「⾃分は婚外⼦で、ずっといじめられてきて⾟かった。差別され落ち込んだ。⾃分のことを半⼈前と思い委縮してきた。」「私たちは、⼦どもの頃から婚外⼦ということで差別され続けてきた。⾃分は場⾯緘黙症になり、妹は⾃殺してしまった。」「婚外⼦だということを知った居住者から、他の住⼈に⾔いふらされ、嫌がらせを受け続け、マンションから退去せざるをえなくなった」
このような差別を助⻑・再⽣産しているのが、婚外⼦に対する差別法制度です。
２０１３年９⽉に婚外⼦相続差別規定は、最⾼裁で憲法違反とされその後法改正されましたが、今も嫡出概念を初めとした差別法制度は維持されています。
また、出⽣届に「嫡出⼦・嫡出でない⼦」の別を記載させる⼾籍法の規定は憲法違反と争った裁判で、同年 9 ⽉下旬最⾼裁は合憲と判断したため、「嫡出⼦・嫡出でない⼦」の別の記載を窓⼝職員が強制する事件が、今も後を絶ちません。
2019 年の⼦どもの権利条約に基づく⽇本審査において、「嫡出でない⼦の概念を廃⽌してはどうか」との委員の質問に、政府は「法律婚主義、法律婚を正当であるとすることによって、嫡出である⼦と嫡出でない⼦というのが、論理必然的に⽣まれてくる。」と述べています。
私たちは、法務省⺠事局と毎年意⾒交換会を⾏っており、そこで「世界中の国が、法律婚主義をとっているが、多くの国で、親の婚姻の有無によって⼦どもを 2 種類に分類することをやめている。⽇本が法律婚主義をとっていることは、嫡出⼦・嫡出でない⼦の区別を廃⽌できない理由にはならない。」と訴えてきましたが、法務省の考えに変化はありません。
2015年12⽉最⾼裁⼤法廷は夫婦同⽒強制を合憲とした判決で、「嫡出⼦であることを⽰すために、-1-⼦が両親双⽅と同⽒である仕組みを確保することにも⼀定の意義がある」と述べ、婚外⼦差別を容認してしまいました。
２００４年１１⽉以前に作成された⼾籍の続柄欄では、婚外⼦と⼀⽬でわかる「⼥」「男」の記載が未だに維持されています。婚外⼦からの申出があれば、「⻑⼥」「⻑男」の記載に変更されますが、婚外⼦に対する差別が根強い中で、⾃ら名乗り出る者は⾮常に少ないのが現状です。また、申出制度は、国が婚外⼦本⼈にカミングアウトを求めるもので、⼈権侵害以外の何物でもありません。
国の責任で、職権で変更すべきです。

英語での４分発言

We demand abolition of discrimination against children born outof wedlock!
Society for Abolishing the Family Registration Systemand Discriminations against Children Born out of Wedlock(AFRDC)E-mail: kouryu2-kai@ac.auone-net.jp
We have received the following heartbreaking cries from children born out of wedlock:"I was an out-of-wedlock child, and it was painful to be bullied all the time. I was not able to receive myself andfelt depressed.”"I was ashamed of myself because I had been discriminated against so much." “We have always been
discriminated against from our childhood because we were born out of wedlock. I suffered from selective mutism,in which I was not able to speak in social settings, and my sister killed herself.”"My neighbor who found out that I was an out-of-wedlock child spread it out. Then I was harassed and forced
to move out of the apartment.”
It is the discriminatory legal system that promotes and reproduces discrimination and unfair treatment to suchpeople.
In September 2013, the Supreme Court ruled that discriminatory provision regarding inheritance of children
born out of wedlock were unconstitutional and the law concerning inheritance was subsequently amended.

-2-But at the same time in another lawsuit in September 2013, the Supreme Court ruled that the provision of
the Family Register Act, which requires a birth registration to indicate whether a child is born in wedlock or not,was not unconstitutional. This ruling has been until now maintained, and there are still many incidents where
the counter staff force the parents to check their children status in a separate entry for " legitimate” (born inwedlock) or “not legitimate” (born out of wedlock).
In the Japanese examination of the Children's Rights Committee in January 2019, the committee memberssuggested that the term ʻillegitimate childʼ be totally abolished. In response, the Japanese delegation answered
as follows: "The Japanese law regards the legal marriage system reasonable. So, the distinction between“legitimate” child and “illegitimate” child inevitably follows.
We have had negotiation meetings annually with the Ministry of Justice's Civil Affairs Bureau, and we haveinsisted that "In many countries that adopt the principle of legal marriage system, children are no longer divided
into two types depending on whether the parents are married or not." We think that because Japan adopts theprinciple of legal marriage, it does not mean the distinction between children born in wedlock and out of wedlock
is necessary. However, the Ministry of Justice has not changed its position until now.
By the way, In December 2015, the Grand Bench of the Supreme Court ruled that the mandatory same
surname of a married couple was constitutional,
In the ruling, the Supreme Court accepted discrimination against children born out of wedlock, saying that there
is also a certain significance in ensuring a system in whicha child has the same name as both parents.
Furthermore, in the relationship column of family registrations created before November 2004, thedescription of "female" and "male," which can be identified ata glance as children born out of wedlock, are still maintained.
If there is a request from a child born out of wedlock to the office,The description will be changed to "eldest daughter" and "eldest son", but inreality, there are very few people

who come forward by themselves because discrimination against children born out of wedlock is deep-rooted
and die-hard.
This application system indeed requires such children to come out in person,
which is nothing less than a human rights violation.
It is the responsibility of the government to rectify discriminatory descriptions
and should be changed ex officio, that is, by the government authority.

-3-