Japan retaliates against ICJ filing again? Opinion against “I take my foot” Why

It is known that the Japanese government is struggling with various countermeasures in relation to the Seoul Central District Act’s judgment of compensation for victims of comfort women. Japanese Foreign Minister Toshimitsu Motegi said at a press conference after telephone talks with Foreign Minister Kang Kyung-wha on the 9th, “an abnormal situation that violates international law and cannot be understood by common sense has occurred.” I will respond to it,” he suggested to take action.

Foreign Minister Kang Kyung-hwa (left) and Japanese Foreign Minister Toshimitsu Motegi (right) shake hands prior to the meeting in Nagoya, Japan on November 23, 2019. [사진=지지통신 제공]

The first action to be mentioned is the International Court of Justice (ICJ) complaint. Asahi Shimbun reported on the 10th, citing a high-ranking official from the Japanese government, “The Japanese government is considering a policy to bring this matter to the ICU, the highest court of the United Nations, as a strong option.”

The reason why ICJ complaints emerged as a powerful solution is because there is a’precedent’. The grounds for the Japanese government’s opposition to the Korean court ruling is the principle of the “sovereign immunity” (state immunity) under customary international law that “a court of one country cannot judge another country as a party to a lawsuit”. The Japanese government argues that it violates this principle that the Korean court ruled in compensation to the Japanese government.

On the other hand, the Seoul Central District Law decided that the sovereignty exemption could not be applied because the damage to the comfort women, which is a crime against humanity systematically committed by the state, violated the’enforced norms’ that are higher in international laws.

In 2004, the Italian Supreme Court ruled in the same logic as the Korean court in a lawsuit against the German government in a lawsuit against the German government by Ruiki Ferini, who was forced to work in Germany during World War II. It is a so-called’perini case’ that acknowledges that the German government is responsible for compensation.

Later, the German government sued the ICJ for violating the principle of sovereign immunity, and the ICJ finally gave Germany a hand. Based on this, the Japanese government expects the same conclusion to be reached if the judgment of the comfort women proceeds as an ICJ lawsuit.

Attorney Kim Kang-won, the legal representative of the comfort women victim’s grandmother’s lawsuit, answered the reporters’ questions after the first trial of 12 comfort women victims, including the late grandmother Bae Chun-hee, filed against the Japanese government at the Central District Court in Seocho-gu, Seoul on the 8th. Are doing. [뉴스1]

However, even if Japan sues this matter to the ICJ, if the Korean government fails to comply, the lawsuit itself will be nullified. Korea is not accepting the ICJ’s’mandatory (mandatory) jurisdiction’ that if the other country files a lawsuit against the ICJ, it must be accepted unconditionally. Japan accepted compulsory jurisdiction in 1958.

For different reasons, there is also a prudence on the ICJ complaint. The Yomiuri Shimbun said on the 10th, “If you quarrel at the ICJ, you can get a sovereign exemption, but there is a concern that the comfort women issue will rise again as a (international) issue,” said the government’s doubts about the effectiveness of this plan.

There is also the possibility that Japan will engage in economic retaliation, as in 2018 when the Supreme Court of Korea ruled in compensation for compulsory conscription. At the time, the Japanese government said, “We are reviewing the double-digit (retaliation) option.” ▶Seizure of assets in Japan owned by the Korean government, etc. ▶Higher tariffs on imports of Korean products ▶Restrictions on issuance of visas for entry into Koreans. ‘Regulation of export of raw materials’ was brought up.

In particular, in a situation where Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga faces a crisis due to a sharp decline in approval ratings after four months in office, the possibility of using a retaliation card against Korea to gather support cannot be ruled out.

On the 8th, when an emergency was declared in the Japanese metropolitan area, a citizen walks through a shopping street in Yokohama, Kanagawa Prefecture, where the lights went out. [로이터=연합뉴스]

What to consider is the situation in Japan. In Japan, an emergency has been declared in Tokyo and other metropolitan areas due to the rapid increase in patients with novel coronavirus infection (Corona 19). As Prime Minister Suga, fixing Corona 19 is bound to be the’first goal’. It could be another handshake if Japan’s economy has collapsed due to Corona 19, and retaliation against Korea puts a burden on the Japanese economy.

A diplomatic news source well versed in Japanese politics said, “The Japanese government will have no choice but to observe the movement of Korea and the trend of public opinion at the same time.” “The public opinion is considering possible measures within the government and taking countermeasures against Korea. If it goes up, there’s a chance we’ll take one of these out.”

The Asahi Shimbun also predicts that the Japanese government is considering the ICJ complaint, but first of all, it is expected to observe the trend of the lawsuit in the future, such as the situation of the plaintiff’s seizure of Japanese government assets. Foreign Minister Motegi is scheduled to hold another telephone talks with Foreign Minister Kang Kyung-wha sooner or later to urge South Korea to respond, Japanese media reported.

Tokyo = Correspondent Lee Young-hee [email protected]