Hwang Geum Joo et al. v. Japan, Minister Yohei Kono, Minister of Foreign Affairs

Court	United States Court of Appeal, District of Columbia, Unites States of America, United States
Case number	01-7169
Decision title	Opinion of the Court
Decision date	28 June 2005
Parties	Hwang Geum Joo Japan
Categories	Crimes against humanity, War crimes
Keywords	international armed conflict, rape, sexual violence, torture, unlawful confinement, war crimes
Links	Opinion of the Court
Other countries involved	Japan

Summary

Between 1931 and 1945, some 200,000 women were forced into sexual slaverty by the Japenese Army. These women, referred to as “comfort women” were recruited through forcible abductions, deception and coercion. Once captured, they were taken by the Japanese military to “comfort stations”, that is, facilities seized or built by the military near the front lines for express purpose of housing these women. Once there, the women would be repeatedly raped, tortured, beaten, mutilated and sometimes murdered. They were denied proper medical attention, shelter and nutrition.

The present lawsuit was brought by fifteen former “comfort women” against Japan. Having been unsuccessful before the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, the Supreme Court vacated the decision of the Court of Appeals and remanded the case. By its decision of 28 June 2005, the Court of Appeals once again dismissed the appeal on the grounds that the Appellant’s claims were non-justiciable under the political question doctrine as they would require the Courts to interpret treaties concluded between foreign States.

Procedural history

On 18 September 2000, fifteen “comfort women” field a lawsuit against Japan in the United States alleging that they were forcibly abducted from their homes and coerced into serving as sex slaves for the Japanese military before and during World War II.

On 4 October 2001, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed the suit on the grounds that Japan enjoyed sovereign immunity pursuant to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act.

On appeal, by a decision of 27 June 2003, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit affirmed the decision of the lower court.

The appellants petitioned the United States Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari. On 14 June 2004, the Supreme Court granted the writ on the grounds that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act was applicable whatever the timing of the underlying conduct in question. The decision of the Court of Appeals was vacated and the decision remanded for re-consideration.

Related developments

On 21 September 2006, the Supreme Court denied certiorari in respect of the appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeals from 2005.

Legally relevant facts

Between 1931 and 1945, some 200,000 women were forced into sexual slavery by the Japenese Army. These women, referred to as “comfort women” were recruited through forcible abductions, deception and coercion. Once captured, they were taken by the Japanese military to “comfort stations”, that is, facilities seized or built by the military near the front lines for express purpose of housing these women. Once there, the women would be repeatedly raped, tortured, beaten, mutilated and sometimes murdered. They were denied proper medical attention, shelter and nutrition.

The “comfort stations” were regulated by the Japanese Army. Soldiers were charged for access with price depending on a woman’s nationality, whilst length of stay and time of visit depended upon the soldier’s rank (para. 3, Appeals Court Opinion from 2003).

Core legal questions

Are US courts entitled to entertain the Appellants’ claims where such claims rest on the correct interpretation of a series of treaties concluded by Japan in order to secure the peace after World War II?

Specific legal rules and provisions

Articles 8(a), 14 and 26 of the Treaty of Peace between Japan and the Allied Powers.
Article 11 of the 1952 Treaty of Peace between Japan and the Republic of China (Taiwan).
Article 2(1) of the Treaty of Peace between Japan and the Republic of Korea (South Korea).
Joint Communiqué between Japan and the People’s Republic of China.
Treaty of Peace and Friendship between Japan and the People’s Republic of China.
Alien Torts Act.

Court's holding and analysis

The United States is not a party to the treaties whose meaning the appellants dispute. Adjudication of such treaties would, as the Executive has put it, undo a settled foreign policy of state-to-state negotiation with Japan and could disrupt Japan’s relations with China and Korea (p. 5). Consequently, the case is rendered non-justiciable under the political question doctrine. The judgment of the District Court is affirmed (p. 6).