Opinion Wanted, color-blind realtors By Tony Laszlo	フレームで見る  英文をプリントする  脚注をプリントする
だれが人権を守ってくれるのか 人への対応を「肌の色」で変えるような行為は 国や地方自治体ぐるみで排除していくべきだ。

One day in the spring of 2001, Srirama Chandra Bemri Murthy telephoned a real estate agency in Warabi City, Saitama Prefecture. Like many couples expecting a first child, it was time for the 20-year-old computer company employee and his wife to look for a new place with a bit more space. But finding a realtor who wouldn't turn the couple away because they weren't Japanese - they hail from India - was turning out to be quite a chore. After meeting with rejection at a number of places, Murthy decided to save some shoe leather by inquiring via the telephone.

The first company he called sounded promising. "Yes, we can help foreigners," the voice on the other end of the line said, "but tell me first, what is the color of your skin?" Murthy could scarcely believe his own ears. "My skin color?" he asked, perplexed. "Yes, is it a normal color? You know, like that of a Japanese," the voice continued. Hurt and angry, Murthy hung up the phone.

Then, over the next few weeks, he attempted to obtain an apology from the agency. As none was forthcoming, he filed a civil case against the firm and the employee who handled his call. In addition, he charged that Saitama Prefecture also bore responsibility for the incident.

In January of this year, the Saitama District Court ordered the company and the employee to pay Murthy a total of ¥500,000 in damages, and rejected the accusations against the prefecture. Murthy has appealed the latter decision, insisting that the prefecture should have taken more effective steps in battling discrimination.

Why take on the prefecture? The Japanese government pledged to eliminate racial discrimination when it ratified the U.N. International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) treaty in 1996. Therefore, says Murthy, Saitama, along with Japan's other local governments, is obliged under this treaty to eradicate such practices.

The person who asked Murthy about his skin color is a long-time employee of the agency who should have known better than to act as she did. Why didn't she? Saitama could have introduced ordinances that make those actions punishable by fine, for example. Signatories of ICERD generally implement such measures, to clearly denote the line between what is and is not appropriate. Saitama's failure to introduce such a measure could be considered negligence.

Murthy's case made headlines earlier this year, and people talked about those "racist Japanese realtors." Interestingly, however, very few of the articles mentioned a certain important detail about the agency involved: it is a member of a famous franchise based in the United States.

When I contacted the company's Japanese headquarters, I learned that the manuals the parent company had sent to its franchisees did not cover human rights concerns. Nor did the company have a plan to revise those manuals to help prevent future violations. In the end, who should bear responsibility for what happened to Murthy: the employee who answered the phone, the agency in Warabi, the parent firm, Saitama Prefecture or the Japanese government? Offhand, I'd say all of the above, wouldn't you?

Shukan ST: Aug. 8, 2003

(C) All rights reserved