Loading

Search

:

Japan Mulls Countermeasures Over ROK Court Ruling

  • Category:Other
 
 
The government plans to continue urging South Korea to correct the violation of international law over a South Korean court ruling ordering Japan to pay damages to 12 former “comfort women.”

If South Korea does not provide an effective solution, the Japanese government will consider countermeasures. “We cannot leave the illegal situation unresolved,” a senior Japanese Foreign Ministry official said.

Foreign Minister Toshimitsu Motegi issued a statement on the finalization of the Seoul Central District Court ruling, saying, “From the principle of sovereign immunity under international law, the Japanese government cannot submit to the jurisdiction of South Korea. The case must be dismissed.”

The Japanese Foreign Ministry has been identifying Japanese state assets in South Korea in preparation for the seizure of such assets to execute the ruling.

Japan plans to take strong countermeasures in the event of an asset seizure, which would constitute “an illegal act based on a violation of international law,” according to a senior Japanese government official.

The South Korean court ruled that the plaintiffs’ right to claim compensation for damages was not covered by such accords as the 1965 Japan-South Korea Agreement on the Settlement of Problems concerning Property and Claims and on Economic Cooperation.

According to the Japanese government, the plaintiffs have no right to seek compensation as the issue of claims between the two countries, including the comfort women issue, was settled “completely and finally” under the 1965 agreement.

The ruling concluded that the women were abducted or kidnapped by Japan to serve as comfort women. However, investigations by the Japanese government found no evidence of forced movement by “the Japanese military or authorities.”

International law specialist Prof. Shigeki Sakamoto of Doshisha University said, “the South Korean court reached a ruling that ignores current international law and could be perceived as pandering to public opinion.”
 
 

 

Comment(s) Write comment

Trackback (You need to login.)