Lee Yong-soo’s grandmother’s cry of tears… is it a trick or a handshake?

This is a proposal made to President Moon Jae-in at a press conference by Lee Yong-soo (93), a victim of Japanese military comfort women. In response to the grandmother’s claim to refer the comfort women issue to the International Court of Justice (ICJ), some people wonder, “Why has the ICJ complaint been not properly discussed?” It is doubtful that ICJ, a judicial body of the United Nations (UN), has not been used in the battle against the comfort women for over 30 years. Experts’ opinions on whether this grandmother’s proposal is the trick to solving the comfort women problem or shaking hands are also mixed.

The reason why the ICJ complaint is unfamiliar is the reason that the discussion itself has been cautious. Six years ago, during the Park Geun-hye administration, the Korean Council for Countermeasures against Mental Problems (Jung Dae Hyup) asserted this. However, it was not promoted as internal opinions diverged about the effectiveness. On the 17th, an official of the Justice Memory Solidarity (Eui-Yeon Jeong) said, “On December 28, 2015, immediately after the Korea-Japan agreement of the Park Geun-hye administration, discussions on the request for referral to the ICJ were in progress. I did” he said.

UN member states such as Korea and Japan are obligated to comply with the ICJ’s judgment. The ICJ decision is final and cannot be appealed. When the agenda is referred, 15 judges of different nationalities informally deliberate on it and make a decision. For the comfort women issue to be referred to the ICJ, it is possible only if both the Korean and Japanese governments respond.

Eui-yeon Eui-yeon believes that the Japanese government is unlikely to go to an international court with only the comfort women issue. As such, ICJ complaints should be approached carefully. An official from Eui-yeon Eui-yeon said, “The concern is that the comfort women issue becomes a clue and is likely to spread to other issues,” he said. “The Dokdo issue and the illegality and legality of colonial rule can be raised.”

ICJ complaints have a complex political and diplomatic context and have pros and cons. Japan proposed a joint complaint with the ICJ on the Dokdo issue in 2012 following the past 1954 and 62. At the time, the Korean government rejected it, saying, “Dokdo, our land, is not a disputed area.”

“‘Comfort women system = crime’, common sense in the international community”

With the proposal of Grandmother Lee Yong-soo, the’Comfort Women in Japan’s International Court of Justice (ICJ) Commission Promotion Committee (Promotion Committee)’ was formed. Grandmother Lee served as the chairman, and Hyun-jung Kim, CEO of’Comfort Women’s Action for Compensation and Education (CARE, formerly Kaju Hanmi Forum KAFC)’, Seo Hyuk-soo, CEO of'(Daegu) Citizens’ Meeting with Grandma of Jeongshin University’, and comfort women from the perspective of international law Dr. Hee-Seok Shin of Yonsei University Law Research Institute, who has been studying the problem, is working with the Promotion Committee.

However, Kim Chang-rok, a researcher on the comfort women issue and a new director of Eui-Yeon Eui-yeon, a professor at the Graduate School of Law at Kyungpook National University, published a’new theory’. “I have to consider whether the argument of the Promotion Committee has any special meaning,” he said.

Professor Kim said, “The fact that the comfort women system is a crime in violation of international law at the time has been confirmed by numerous UN human rights organizations since the 1990s, and has been declared in court in 2000 and has become the common sense of the international community.” “I wonder if there is a need to file a complaint against the ICJ, which takes years to be identified and costs a lot of money.” It is whether the ICJ complaint is of any benefit to Korea.

It is pointed out that bringing the comfort women issue to ICJ not only requires concentration of diplomatic power at home and abroad, but also has a high cost burden, such as securing an international law firm specializing in ICJ, whose “call is worth”. Another weakness is that Korea has no experience in filing an ICJ complaint. Japan has experienced two losses and one victory in the ICJ.

Even if the ICJ ruling confirms that the comfort women system was a crime in violation of international law at the time, there are other risks. There is a possibility that a judgment such as,’Procedurally, the right to claim personal compensation was abandoned by the Claims Agreement in 1965, and the Korean courts should respect Japan’s sovereign immunity’.

Professor Kim said, “It is not necessary to completely rule out the possibility of a full victory by filing a complaint with the ICJ, but Dr. Hee-Seok Shin (of the Promotion Committee) also said,’It is highly likely to accept some of the claims of Korea and Japan.’ I said. “This judgment is what the Japanese government is trying to obtain through the ICJ,” he said. “The Japanese government’s allegation of’violation of international law’ may lead to a declaration that it conforms to international law.” “The Supreme Court ruling in 2018 and the Seoul Central District Court ruling in 2021 violated international law, and the demands that the victims and the citizens who supported them for the past 30 years have urged’Japan to take responsibility’ also violate international law. It is a concern that it can be made.

Professor Kim also said, “There is a high possibility that Korea will become a country that harassed Japan based on false claims.”

There is also an opinion that in accordance with Article 3 of the 1965 Korea-Japan Claims Agreement, the’consultation’ between the two countries should take precedence, not an ICJ complaint. Article 3 of the Korea-Japan Claims Agreement stipulates that’disputes concerning the interpretation and implementation of the agreement can be resolved through diplomatic channels first, and if not, can be referred to the International Arbitration Committee’.

“Going to the ICJ without a consultation process violates the claim agreement itself,” said Choi Bong-tae, who has led the litigation for comfort women and compulsory conscription, and said, “Going to the ICJ without a consultation process violates the claim agreement itself.” “It is unconstitutional to not make all efforts to resolve disputes against Korea,” he pointed out.

“I wonder if my grandmother would be frustrated because the government did not go forward,” he said. “Since the Japanese government does not apologize, she urged the ICJ to be referred to the ICJ in the sense that she wants to be apologized while alive using all means.” Chairman Choi added, “I think it’s okay to try diplomatic consultations and go to the ICJ if it can’t be resolved.”

On the 16th, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in the proposal of the Promotion Committee on the 16th, “I would like to listen to the position of the comfort women’s grandmother a little more.” In Japan, the ruling Liberal Democratic Party and others are insisting on a complaint against the ICJ, claiming that the ruling of the Korean court’s’payment of Japanese government alimony’ is a violation of international law.

Reporter Kwon Hye-rim [email protected]