HRWが動いた
世界最大の人権組織"Human Rights Watch"が都城市の条例改正に関して抗議の書簡を送りました。市長と、市議会宛に送付したようです。内容は、だいたい尾辻さんや私たちが指摘したのと同じことです。翻訳はのちほど追記しましょう。
ところで、私もあの書簡を書いてから、ほんとオレって言い方がキツいなあ、と自分でもなんだかぐったりしたんですけど、さて、一地方都市の条例に、他の土地に住む、都城と直接関係のない人たちが何を言えるのか、もしくは何を言ってよいのか？ という問題は考えなくてはならないでしょうね。
でもね、基本的にはこうだと思うの。
都城はまず、条例を市民に向けて制定しながらも、それは政治として、他者へ向けてのメッセージ性を帯びるのは当然だろうということ。
すると、それに関して、他者がどうとかこうとかいうのは間違いだ、となれば、そのジェンダーニュートラルな平等社会を作ろうという条例に、それはいかん、という、今回の“改悪”のきっかけとなった反対運動自体も市内・市民からというより勝共＝統一協会＝世界日報から来たんだから、それ自体も認められないだろうということになる。
つまりね、政治的ディスコースというのは、そういう性格を帯びざるを得ない。地域に関係なく、その反対も広く受ける、賛成も受ける、ということになるわけだ。公的言論というのは政治レヴェルの高低にかかわらずそういうもん。だから北朝鮮や中国の人権に関して我々が危惧し意見を言うことができる。アフリカやイスラム諸国でのゲイ弾圧に関して我々が抗議を行うのです。そこでもせめぎ合い。
したがって、都城が、他所の連中にいわれる筋合いはない、というのはぜんぜん成り立たない論理なんです。
ということで、HRWからの書簡は次のとおりっす。
Letter to the mayor of Miyakonojo Municipality about the removal of "sexual orientation" from the gender-equality ordinance
September 14, 2006
His Honor Nagamine Makoto
Mayor
Miyakonojo City
Miyazaki Prefecture
Japan
Dear Mayor:
On behalf of Human Rights Watch, I write in protest against the move to eliminate references to “sexual orientation” from Miyakonojo City’s “Ordinance for the formation of a gender-equal society.” Language affirming equality on the basis of sexual orientation has been part of that ordinance since 2003. Its proposed removal—by a process which has excluded the full input of citizens and civil society—would send a damaging message that your community is regressing from the promise of equality and its commitment to non-discrimination.
Suggest This Page to a Friend
Printer Friendly Version
Related Material
More of Human Rights Watch's work on Japan
Country Page
Human Rights Watch's LGBT website
Country Page
Japan: Keep Equality Protections for Lesbians and Gays
Press Release, September 14, 2006
Free Email Newsletter
Contribute to Human Rights Watch
On behalf of Human Rights Watch, I write in protest against the move to eliminate references to “sexual orientation” from Miyakonojo City’s “Ordinance for the formation of a gender-equal society.” Language affirming equality on the basis of sexual orientation has been part of that ordinance since 2003. Its proposed removal—by a process which has excluded the full input of citizens and civil society—would send a damaging message that your community is regressing from the promise of equality and its commitment to non-discrimination.
As you are aware, the Basic Law for a Gender-Equal Society (Law 78/1999), passed by Japan’s Diet in 1999, committed Japan to “respect for the human rights of women and men, including: respect for the dignity of men and women as individuals; no gender-based discriminatory treatment of women or men; and the securing of opportunities for men and women to exercise their abilities as individuals” (article 3). While the law did not propose penalties for discrimination, it was an important affirmation of government’s positive responsibility to promote equality at all levels. The same law made local governments responsible for “formulation and implementation of policies related to promoting formation of a gender-equal society corresponding to national measures (article 9). In response, Miyakonojo City in 2003 passed a human rights ordinance that affirmed the equality of people regardless of sexual orientation as well as gender. It was one of the first local governments in Japan to include sexual orientation in its commitment to promote equality. The final text of the ordinance was achieved through a process including open hearings at which citizens as well as local lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) groups spoke.
However, Miyakonojo City was consolidated with three other towns in January 2006, and officials agreed that ordinances enacted before this would undergo review. Human Rights Watch is concerned by reports that an open hearing was not held as the “Ordinance for the formation of a gender-equal society” was revised. LGBT groups and individuals and their supporters were denied the full opportunity to express their case. While municipal authorities insist that the proposal rises from discussions of a committee of experts, that discussion has not been made public.
Article 2.1 of the previous ordinance stated, “In the gender-equal society, for all people irrespective of gender and sexual orientation, human rights should be fully respected.” Article 2.6 defined “sexual orientation” as “a concept describing the direction of an individual’s sexuality, which can be directed to someone of the different or same gender, or to someone irrespective of their gender.”
In the ordinance now proposed, Article 2.1 now reads, “In the gender-equal society, for all people, their human rights should be equally respected.” Article 2.6 has been completely deleted.
The rationale for these proposed changes is explained, on the city’s website, as “to simplify the contents.” A simplification of an ordinance on gender equality which removes the term “gender” as well as “sexual orientation” is not a streamlining but a drastic weakening of the contents.
The Miyazaki Prefecture’s “Miyazaki Prefecture Development Policies of Human Rights Education,” introduced in 2005, includes a section on “Problems faced by gender minorities.” This section recognizes persisting discrimination and prejudice based on sexual orientation as well as gender, and urges active steps toward accepting sexual diversity. The new text of your city’s ordinance belies this aim. It also places your city at odds with the express finding of international human rights bodies that sexual orientation should be a status protected from discrimination. In 1994, the United Nations Human Rights Committee, which interprets and monitors compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), found that protections against discrimination in articles 2 and 26 of that treaty should be understood to include sexual orientation. Japan has been a party to the ICCPR since 1979.
The proposed revision of the gender-equality ordinance will be debated by the city assembly this week. I urge you to support retaining the existing language. Miyakonojo City’s resonant support of equality made it a model in Japan. Its example is too important for you to retract it now.
Sincerely,
Scott Long
Director
Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Rights Program
Human Rights Watch