Putting Yasukuni in its place

小泉首相の靖国参拝問題

The ruling was in response to a lawsuit filed by more than 200 people in Kyushu. The plaintiffs demanded compensation from the government on the grounds that his trip to the Shinto memorial violated the separation of state and religion, and caused them psychological suffering. The court, however, rejected the demand for compensation, handing the defendants — the prime minister and the government — a technical victory.

Mr. Koizumi has visited the shrine four times, most recently in January. Each trip has drawn sharp criticism at home and abroad. China, South Korea and Taiwan have reacted strongly, as Japan's militaristic past evokes bitter memories. The ruling avers, by extension, that the succeeding three visits were unconstitutional.

Yasukuni Shrine is dedicated to the nation's 2.5 million war dead, including 14 Class-A war criminals of World War II who were convicted by the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, or the Tokyo Trial. The recent ruling characterized the shrine as the "spiritual backbone of state Shinto," noting that the shrine continued to deify the war dead until the end of the war in 1945. Although the facility is run by a private religious organization, it retains some of its prewar trappings.

The ruling defined the nature of Mr. Koizumi's visit as "official." He went there as prime minister, using a government limousine, taking public secretaries with him, signing the visitors' book as "Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi" and attaching his name card to a floral offering. Following the event, he issued a statement through the chief Cabinet secretary.

The presiding judge described his August 2001 trip as follows: "The prime minister has visited Yasukuni Shrine, which is not necessarily an appropriate place to honor the war dead, as many as four times, despite strong opposition from within the Liberal-Democratic Party and the Cabinet. In light of this, the visits have been made on the basis of political motivations, in the knowledge that they involved constitutional problems."

Mr. Koizumi defends his Yasukuni visits, saying, "I don't understand why it is unconstitutional." During a parliamentary exchange earlier this year, he said: "We owe our prosperity to the sacrifices made by those who died in war. It's my earnest desire to honor those war dead and offer my respects and thanks to them."

Honoring the war dead is a natural act of mourning. But Mr. Koizumi is not a private citizen, but the prime minister of Japan. What he says or does in public assumes official meaning. So he needs to be very careful about visiting a religious facility, particularly one that used to serve as a moral beacon for Japanese militarism.

History shows that politics and religion make a dangerous mix. In Japan, from the Meiji Era (beginning in 1868) to the end of World War II, Shinto helped form the national character — with tragic consequences. That is why the postwar Constitution stipulates that "the state and its organs shall refrain from religious education or any other religious activity."

The prime minister represents the state, so he must refrain from any activity that may be deemed religious. Some argue that he can visit there as a "private citizen" without using a government car and public money — as former Prime Minister Takeo Miki did. But for as long as he remains at Japan's helm, praying there in a "private capacity" is bound to be seen as an expediency.

Significantly, the district court said its "unconstitutional" ruling is open to interpretation. A number of other courts have made their decisions. As far as Mr. Koizumi's visits are concerned, though, there is as yet no Supreme Court judgment. But this hardly means that he should continue to visit Yasukuni Shrine. He should respect the latest ruling, even though it represents a lower court decision.

The Japan Times Weekly
April 17, 2004
(C) All rights reserved

      この訴訟では、九州の住民ら200人以上が首相の靖国参拝は違憲と主張し、国に慰謝料を求めてきたが、判決では慰謝料請求は棄却された。

      首相はこれまでに4回、靖国参拝をしており、そのたびに国内外から批判を浴びている。靖国神社は過去の日本の軍国主義時代を思い起こさせることから、中国、韓国、台湾などは批判を強めている。今回の判決の延長線上で考えると、01年以降3回の参拝も違憲ということになる。

      判決は首相の参拝について、公用車を使用、秘書官を随行、「内閣総理大臣小泉純一郎」と記帳、名札をつけて献花、事後に官房長官が発表したなどの理由で、首相の職務の執行と位置づけた。

      判決はさらに「首相は、自民党や内閣からも強い反対意見があり、戦没者追悼場所としては必ずしも適切でない靖国神社を4回も参拝した。憲法上の問題があると認識しながら、政治的意図に基づいて参拝を行った」と批判した。

      戦没者に敬意を払うのは自然な行為だが、小泉首相は私人ではない。公的な場での言動は特別な意味があることを考慮すべきだ。

      政治と宗教が結びつくと危険な結果を生むことは歴史が示している。明治時代から第二次世界大戦終戦まで、神道は国民性の涵養に利用された。それゆえ、戦後憲法は政教分離を定めているのだ。

      首相は国家を代表する存在であるから、宗教的とみられる行動は避けねばならない。私人として公用車、税金を使わずに参拝しても首相である限り問題になる。

      小泉首相の靖国参拝について最高裁の判断が下されたわけではないが、このほどの判決を尊重して靖国参拝はとりやめるべきである。