Columns that reveal the world
- Getting up close and personal with the researchers -

I am researching LGBTQ human rights issues from the perspective of international and comparative law, focusing on the role that law should play. I am analyzing how legal systems related to the protection of LGBTQ human rights are progressing internationally and what the barriers are, while conducting comparative research with Japan. The underlying theme is how to interact with the international community, especially the United Nations.

When I moved from the countryside to Tokyo as a student, I met many different people and learned that there are some people whose attributes and family relationships are protected by law and some who are not. I felt that the issue of how diverse family structures and the law should relate to each other was particularly close to me, so I chose to study family law at my undergraduate level. I then studied international human rights law at graduate school, and it was there that I first came to understand the connections between family, human rights, and the various issues facing the international community, which led to my current research.

In international comparisons, legal developments for the protection of LGBTQ human rights do not proceed uniformly, but depend on the systems and cultures rooted in each country and region. Currently, I am exploring commonalities in the Asian region in comparative LGBTQ law. What can be confirmed from the laws and court cases in this region is the strength of family norms. There is a strong culture of valuing family over the individual, which is clearly different from European countries where individualism is thoroughly implemented as a system. In addition to national legal policies, understanding from family is also essential for issues such as coming out. The current situation is that social awareness and legal policies do not necessarily link. If we idealize European countries and proceed with similar legal developments without taking into account the background of such systems and culture, family norms may be strengthened and human rights protection may be regressed.

Such legislation and legal reforms go through a complex process that involves the social structure and systems of each country, so they are not necessarily an approach that can be implemented quickly, but I feel that they have great potential for social impact. When the law states or the court recognizes that "society should be like this to guarantee the human rights of all people," it can be a catalyst for change in that society. In Japan, the SOGI Awareness Promotion Act came into effect in 2023 and attracted a lot of attention. Although it cannot be denied that the content has some shortcomings, this law can also be a force for changing social norms and people's perceptions themselves.

On the other hand, the law has limitations in that there are gaps in protection. The law draws a line somewhere and says, "I'll protect you up to this point, but I can't protect you from this point onwards." For example, in Japan, you can change your gender if you meet certain conditions, but there has been little discussion about how non-binary people can change their gender or change it as they wish. It is still difficult to live in Japan without worrying about the nature of your gender. Even in this society where respect for basic human rights is supposed to be a constitutional principle, there are people who are overlooked by the law. I am so particular about the law because I believe it is meaningful to question the boundaries drawn by law from within.

In researching human rights issues, I am concerned that in Japan there may be a fundamental misunderstanding of the term "human rights." Human rights are, needless to say, "the rights and freedoms that all human beings have based on their inherent dignity," and are something that all people should be born with. However, I would like to say, without fear of being misunderstood, that in Japan, human rights are not guaranteed without the understanding of the majority, and that there is a natural feeling that human rights are given in some kind of barter. The current situation in which human rights are often replaced with the word "compassion" is clearly a mistake, even in light of the history of the establishment of human rights.

There is another characteristic Japanese attitude towards human rights. That is, a strong rejection of discrimination. Discrimination exists on a daily basis, and people cannot live without discriminating. Of course, this does not mean that discrimination is acceptable or inevitable. We must think about how to realize human rights on the premise that anyone can become a discriminator. Despite this, there are many people who deny it, saying, "I am not discriminatory," or "It is hurtful to be called a discriminator," and I feel that they have a very weak awareness that they are contributing to some kind of discrimination. This backlash seems to occur because people are reluctant to pay attention to the state of laws and systems due to the mistaken understanding that "human rights = compassion," and therefore cannot accept the reality that they live in a daily life with discrimination.

Accept the fact that everyone has prejudices and stereotypes to a greater or lesser extent, and that society and systems preserve a fair amount of discrimination, and stop and think about the other person's position and values without emotionally rejecting people with attributes that are difficult for you to understand. You also need a perspective that allows you to face problems with the law and the way society is, while constantly verifying whether your own thoughts are appropriate. Human rights are a concept that serves as a tool for the right of all people to live equally. The idea that "I cannot accept that way of life because I cannot understand it" is not valid. If the true meaning of human rights can be widely shared, many people will move closer to a society where it is easier to live. It is also necessary to make human rights an easy-to-use tool so that people who have been once left out by the boundaries of laws and systems can speak up.

In my research activities, I always try to be critical of my own claims and not be overconfident. After writing and publishing a paper, I make it a rule to periodically review whether it was really correct.

This is because, unfortunately, I believe that the day when human rights are truly realized will never come. All human beings, regardless of their attributes or characteristics, do not enjoy human rights equally, but rather should enjoy them. This is why we will continue to look directly at the daily lives of people whose human rights may be violated and those who are in difficult situations, while constantly reexamining the line drawn by laws and systems. Even if we are able to "protect human rights," the current situation is that the next moment someone else will be left out. I would like to continue to approach my research with a stance of not taking my eyes off those who are left out and continuing to question their existence.

In recent years, LGBTQ-related topics have been increasingly featured. When discussing these topics in class, I instruct students to approach them from multiple perspectives in order to have them think about them objectively as an academic subject, despite the different stereotypes each student has. I always ask questions to those who have opposing opinions so that they can explore why they came to their opinions. In the process, you may find that your own arguments are strengthened, or conversely, you may find that you are lacking or have problems. In group work, we use a debate format in which students debate from the perspective of those with opposing opinions, and in reports, we ask students to think about how they would respond if they were in the position of a judge, lawyer, or official. We provide plenty of opportunities to develop the ability to see things from various perspectives.

As in Department of Human Rights' specialized subject "Human Rights in the Field A and B," it is very important to face reality rather than armchair theory. On the other hand, it is important to be careful not to "feel like you've seen everything." What you know is only "that field," and you must calmly judge whether it is okay to generalize. Even if you have heard the story of the person involved, it is dangerous to simply say, "People with these attributes are in trouble with XX." I would like students to understand that after seeing the field, it is necessary to look at "what is not there at that field."

Another thing I want to say is to write down your daily doubts and frustrations and keep them in your mind. Even if they are trivial matters, it is not uncommon for them to be connected to important social issues. I'm sure that at some point, the things you learned at university will organically connect, and the true nature of the discomfort you once felt will become clear.

2022 year 6 The book was published in the month of 34 Ionaka Ikuo Family Law Academic Award Encouragement Award winning work.