Nobuaki Tanaka
Lawyer, Toyota Branch, Meijo Law Office

1. The importance of activities by civil society

Over 100 members of civil society from Japan, including disabled people themselves and people involved with disabled people’s groups (hereinafter, “disabled people’s groups and others”), attended the periodic review of Japan carried out by the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities of the United Nations (hereinafter, “the Committee) on 22 and 23 August, 2022, and observed the constructive dialogue between the Committee and the representatives of the Japanese government. As well as participating in the private briefings which were held before the periodic review, disabled people’s groups and others also lobbied individual members of the Committee.

This periodic review was the first since Japan became a signatory to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (hereinafter, “the Convention”), and the fact that so many disabled people’s groups and others travelled to Geneva, proactively appealed to the Committee and to each of its members, and directly reported on the actual conditions of disabled people in Japan, was extremely meaningful in laying the foundations for the Committee to ask substantive questions to the representatives of the Japanese government during the constructive dialogue. We also must not forget that proactive appeals such as these by disabled people’s groups and others are an opportunity for them to convey their passion for systemic reform directly to each member of the Committee.

The members from the disabled people’s groups and others who participated overflowed with passion from each of their standpoints for remedying the current problems in order to enable disabled people, who are trying their hardest to live in this present moment, to lead their daily lives with fewer obstacles, and to create a society in which children with disabilities can have a wider range of choices for their lives from now on. I am certain that this passion was communicated to each member of the Committee.

2. The importance of the parallel reports submitted by civil society

Thanks in part to this lobbying by disabled people’s groups and others, I felt that many of the questions from the Committee to the Japanese government representatives in the course of the constructive dialogue were the right ones, taking into account the current issues in Japan. Of course, this result can be attributed to the comprehensive private briefings and lobbying which were carried out, but we must also point to the provision of abundant examples of the current issues in Japan, together with accurate information, in the parallel reports submitted by disabled people’s groups and others in preparation for Japan’s periodic review. Looking at the contents of the concluding observations, we can see that they incorporate many points for improvement indicated in the parallel reports submitted by civil society, including the Japan Disability Forum (JDF).

As one example, I would like to introduce the concluding observations on “procedural accommodations”, which are laid down in Article 13 of the Convention (Access to Justice).

3. The constructive dialogue and concluding observations relating to “procedural accommodations”

Article 13 of the Convention states that “States Parties shall ensure effective access to justice for persons with disabilities on an equal basis with others, including through the provision of procedural and age-appropriate accommodations”. It also makes clear that the “procedural accommodations” mentioned here are a different concept from “reasonable accommodation”, and are not limited by the idea of “disproportionate or excessive burden”. The JDF parallel report pointed out that there is no regulation defining these “procedural accommodations” in Japan’s Code of Civil Procedure, Code of Criminal Procedure, or elsewhere, and called for the establishment of regulations for the swift provision of procedural accommodations suited to the characteristics of each disabled individual. As a result, during the constructive dialogue, Committee member Mr. Schefer asked the Japanese government representatives whether or not there were plans to lay down regulations establishing procedural accommodations for all disabled people in all criminal, civil, administrative, and other proceedings.

The Japanese government representatives replied that legal provisions relating to the “procedural accommodations” for disabled people called for by Clause 13 of the Convention already existed, specifically the provision requiring “accommodation to securing a means of communication in accordance with the characteristics of individual persons with disabilities” in Article 29 of the Basic Act for Persons with Disabilities, and the fact that reasonable accommodation for disabled people is included in the duty of fairness by the courts laid down in Article 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure. However, the use of the term “reasonable accommodation” in the response by the Japanese government representatives shows that the existing legal system cannot be said to guarantee the “procedural accommodations” demanded by Article 13 of the Convention, as does the fact that under the current legal system, when hearing-impaired people use civil proceedings, the cost of ensuring the necessary sign-language interpretation is considered as one of the costs of the lawsuit, and they are forced to bear this cost if they lose their suit. Given this, item 30 (b) of the concluding observations pointed out that procedural accommodations for disabled people should be guaranteed, irrespective of the content of the disability in question, in all legal codes.

4. Conclusion

Looked at in this way, we understand that the series of activities by disabled people’s groups and others – the submission of parallel reports, participation in private briefings, and lobbying – leads to accurate concluding observations. Once again, I feel how important it is for civil society to work together to carry out a similar series of activities in preparation for the next periodic review.