GENERAL ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION A/RES/78/234 “A GLOBAL CALL FOR
CONCRETE ACTION FOR THE ELIMINATION OF RACISM, RACIAL DISCRIMINATIONXENOPHOBIA AND RELATED INTOLERANCE AND THE COMPREHENSIVE
IMPLEMENTATION OF AND FOLLOW-UP TO THE DURBAN DECLARATION AND
PROGRAMME OF ACTION”
28 June 2024
INTRODUCTION
The International Movement Against All Forms of Discrimination and Racism (IMADR) is aninternational non-profit, non-government human rights organisation devoted to eliminating all
forms of discrimination and racism, forging international solidarity among discriminatedgroups and advancing international human rights system. IMADR appreciates that Office ofthe High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) offers the opportunity to contribute tothe development of the report of the UN Secretary-General in accordance with the UN
General Assembly resolution (A/RES/78/234). Our submission provides inputs, responding
to the several guided questions.

HATE SPEECH AND INCITEMENT TO RACIAL DISCRIMINATION
Hate speech is rampant in Japan, especially on the Internet. A prominent case is where afemale politician repeatedly wrote racist statements in her blog or on social network services,
and incited racial hatred among her supporters. It started in February 2016 when CEDAW
considered the State report of Japan at its 63rd session. There, minority women fromBuraku, Ainu indigenous and resident Korean communities joined the session to voice up
against intersecting forms of discrimination they faced. She, who was not a member ofParliament at the time, attended the review with her colleagues who supported the history
revision. The blog article contained spy photographs of minority women with texts ridiculingand deriding them as ‘customed ants’ or ‘having a problem of dignity’. She posted the same
article on social network services. The effect of such incitement to racism by a series ofposts has been tremendous, and the minority women concerned have been exposed to therisk of serious discrimination driving themselves in keeping silent. During the 210th
Extraordinary Diet Session in 2022, she, as an MP and a Parliamentary Secretary at thetime, was questioned about these words and actions by other MPs several times in thedifferent Parliament committees. Yet, she never admitted that what she had done constituted
hate speech inciting hatred against these women. Instead, she kept saying, “I hurt people
with my poor expressions” and “It was conveyed as if I had discriminated”.
The prime minister as well as the Minister of Justice failed to admit it as "hate speech" or"racial discrimination" despite the fact that Japan is bound by the ICERD, to be specific by its
Article 4 © that stipulates "shall not permit public authorities or public institutions, nationalor local, to promote or incite racial discrimination." After all, she voluntarily resigned as
the government position as a Parliamentary Secretary, not the dismissal by the PrimeMinister. She still holds her seat in the Parliament.

SYTEMIC RACISM
The Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, which is the ministry incharge of education policy of the State party, has not been willing to work on solving theproblem even after receiving the concluding observations of the Committee on theElimination of Racial Discrimination in August 20181. Japanese schools have the positions ofprincipal, vice-principal, chief teacher, teacher, and instructor. However, foreign teachers inpublic schools can only take the position of instructors at the bottom. This is because
foreigners are excluded from the positions of principal through teacher. Japanese citizens
are hired as teachers if they pass the teacher employment examination. After being hired, it
is possible to be promoted to the principal. On the other hand, even if a foreigner gains ateacher's license and even passes the teacher employment examination like a Japanesecitizen, they can only be appointed as instructors and will remain in this position until
retirement, and cannot be promoted.
It is estimated that 300 or more ethnic Koreans in Japan and other foreign nationals holdteaching jobs in public schools across Japan, but the difference between the lifetime
earnings of a person who remains an instructor and one who rises to the position of principal
is said to be 10 to 20 million yen (approx. USD65,000-130,000). In this way, foreign faculty
members are placed at a financial disadvantage. The Government of Japan insists that"public servant positions involving the exercise of public authority or participation in public
will formation are restricted to Japanese nationals” 2, but this is not based in law. The
government’s claims that this is a "natural matter of course", is equivalent to saying that it is"natural" to discriminate against foreigners. Article 4 of the Covenant on Economic, Social
and Cultural Rights states, "…the State may subject such rights only to such limitations as
are determined by law…", but the Government of Japan violates the rights of foreigners byadministrative notices, etc., regardless of the law.
The Government of Japan is dragging in the present the same state-controlled education
system of the militaristic era before the defeat of Japan in 1945. It is thought that there is anidea that only teachers who are national citizens can perform educational activities in theexecution of nationalist education. Similarly, foreign teachers are considered to be an
obstacle in promoting education that respects the imperial family, fosters patriotism, andfosters children who pledge allegiance to the nation. Therefore, foreign teachers are only
assigned to the lowest-rung jobs in school education.
Historically, when the San Francisco Treaty was concluded in 1952, it allowed Japan todeprive people of formerly colonised countries by Japan of their Japanese citizenship. Then,people who had already been public officers, including teachers, were forced to naturalise.
For those who denied naturalisation, the government expressed its view that public officers

1
2

CERD/C/JPN/CO/10-11, para.22, 34(e)CERD/C/JPN/CO/10-11, para.81

need Japanese citizenship. Such systemic racism rooted in colonial history has a hand in thereproduction of unequal relationships and excluding attitudes towards ‘foreigners’.

CHILDREN AND YOUTH OF AFRICAN DESCENT
Hairstyle and hair texture are influential factors that children and youth of African descentface discrimination at school. In February 2023, a ninth-grade male student of African
descent was not able to attend the graduation ceremony owing to his cornrow hairstylewhich was, according to the school, against school rules3. He was ordered to sit on thesecond floor, isolated from other students, and prohibited from responding when his namewas called. Then, he and his family decided to leave in the middle of the ceremony since
there was no point in being at it.
Concerning the reason why he could not join the ceremony as other students did, the deputy
headteacher repeatedly states “he should know the rule” when his parents asked. The
school’s rule stipulates that the hairstyle should be ‘clean and appropriate for a high school
student’ without prohibition on cornrow hairstyles. Underlyingly, there is the idea that straighthair is cleaner and more appropriate for students than curly hair, which was shared among
teachers. Hairstyles are intertwined with hair texture. Cornrow hairstyles is used mostly bypeople of African descent to tighten their curly hair. That hairstyle is considered ‘clean’ and‘appropriate’ for ceremony in their cultural context. Since hair is not just a hair and it shows
one’s identity and culture, denying it hurt dignity of students of African descent as illustrated
by the student saying “I felt to be told that it was not special day to me. The hairstyle is myfather's roots and my culture as a person of African descent” 4.
The prohibition of certain hairstyles has been a problem regardless of their racial or nationalorigin in Japan5. It is not rare for Japanese schools to have teachers and/or school rules thatprohibit a hair in buns, braided hair, two-block hair, ponytails and among other hairstyles aswell as that do not acknowledge curly hair. Such attitudes towards hair are internalised by
students and students with curly hair are more likely to be a target of bullying. In this way,
the idea of straight hair as better is normalised and reproduced, marginalising or
discriminating people without straight hair.
However, that has a racial aspect. As illustrated by the incident above, the attitude towards
certain hairstyles interweaved hair texture that is natural to a student’s racial origins might
disseminate negative stereotypes or prejudices in relation to their race. Moreover, it lowers
the self-esteem of students, who are also in sensitive adolescent period, hurts them and(re)produces a vicious circle. In these ways, students of African descent experience racial
discrimination on the ground of their hair texture and hairstyles.

3

https://mainichi.jp/articles/20230327/k00/00m/040/127000
Ibid5
https://imadr.net/books/216_5/
4