Court rejects 'Kimigayo' suit by 172 teachers who refused to stand up

Friday 27th March, 07:19 AM JST

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

› Login to comment

Latest 15 of 39 Total Comments Show All

GJDailleult at 03:28 PM JST - 27th March

JT could just recycle the comments from previous articles every time this topic come up, because are the comments are always the same. So I will join in and say what I always do - this issue has nothing to do with school rules or anthems in other countries, and they are never going to change the anthem or stop playing it in order to solve the problem. It's about the historical interpretation of WW2 - promoting the right wing interpretation and shutting up the people who don't share that point of view. Nothing else.
IvanCoughalot at 04:03 PM JST - 27th March

You're British too and were never forced into ceremonies that made you stand up for God Save the Queen.

How do you know where I hail from, Patrick?

In any case, refusal to stand for the National Anthem, once a year at the Founder's Day Mass, was not a decision many boys took lightly at my school. I think it was Colin Minnikin who tried it once and he was given a thorough counselling at the business end of Brother Thomas' cane.

The rule was to stand for the anthem, and boys stood for the anthem if they had any desire to sit comfortably ever again.

That's the way it should be. If children are taught at school that they can choose which rules apply to them, it creates a mindset which does society no good at all.

By all means teach them to think critically, teach them to debate and to analyse and make informed judgements, but to teach children that they just needn't do anything they don't feel like doing - and to see this reinforced by teachers' example - is not going to do anyone any favours.

Children need rules, and rules must be enforced by their teachers whether they like them or not. And if that means a sore arse and hanging from the wallbars, then so be it.
Patrick Smash at 04:16 PM JST - 27th March

Ivan,

You write British English, and can spell, so I assumed you were British. Where you're from is relevant to the discussion, as the Brits and Japanese are unique in that they both have politically-charged anthems.

I also wouldn't send my kids to a school where they were forced to attend mass. I don't think the religious indoctrination of youngsters is the concern of a school any more than the forced singing of imperialist anthems is. That's my opinion. Now a good thrashing for silent impudence or the breaching of fog laws is a different kettle of fish. Those things need to be dealt with.
herefornow at 04:31 PM JST - 27th March

IvanCoughalot -- I think you are missing a key point here. And that is, that in a true democracy, people, even those under contract to the government, have a right to express their conscience when they feel an order is unfair. Otherwise, you just start slowly deteriorating into a totalitarian form of government. How can it possibly be to Japan's long-term betterment for kids to be taught people must do something, even if they believe it is against their principles, simply because the school board says so? Is conformity that much more important than freed om of thought and expression.
presto345 at 05:06 PM JST - 27th March

The anarchists are among us :-> We, individuals, decide what is right . . .
IvanCoughalot at 05:27 PM JST - 27th March

A school is not a "true Democracy". By its very nature, it is an autocratic and authoritarian organisation, where the people in charge teach the people who have been sent there to learn.

If kids refuse to do as they are told, they should be thrashed vigorously.
Statistician at 05:36 PM JST - 27th March

Judgement doesn't say anything about singing it nicely. Or in tune. Or not wearing a sign around my neck saying I was forced to do this.
rick0909 at 08:22 PM JST - 27th March

I think most of the comments here fail to see that the court did not take on the debate of whether the flag and anthem are a good or bad thing.

As always, Japanese answers are subtle and nuanced. The teachers are public servants and also teachers. They are not acting as private citizens when they are at work. Therefore, they should stand and sing (according to the court).

Regardless of the history and emotional impact of the flag and song, not showing respect to them also means you are not showing respect to Japan. I think that is what the court is saying.

If the teachers are REALLY that angry about it, they could work for private schools. But I am sure they have even stricter rules regarding teacher conduct.
sharky1 at 08:23 PM JST - 27th March

It was a session of government that supported the return to monarchy that approved this particular song as the national anthem. It is a war time era song and actually goes against the Japanese constitution. It is not out of disrespect for the nation that the teachers refuse to stand and sing this particular song. They refuse out of moral courage in advocating that Japan not go back to the way it was before the war. As for the examples they are setting for the students? Teach my kids moral courage any day!
30061015 at 11:32 PM JST - 27th March

Freedom is never free
rick0909 at 12:18 AM JST - 28th March

sharky1, I'm not saying what they are doing is right or wrong, I'm just saying why they lost the suit.

Please tell me how a song with no lyrics can go against a constitution?

If the teachers wanted to express themselves and teach their students moral courage, they could also contact their representatives in the Diet, walk around Tokyo getting people to sign petitions, go on strike, go on television to get their message out, etc.

Then they could express themselves and show their students how to effect change in the government and how the political process works.
ca1ic0cat at 04:52 AM JST - 28th March

You may not always agree with the government but respect for the government is part of the democratic system. Nobody is saying "you gotta sing" or asking to recite some pledge of allegiance. Standing is simply a show of respect. If you can't even respect the government of the country you live in it might be better to emigrate.

If you can't stand up I think it's just saying that you are a social boor with a chip on your shoulder. Get over it and respect the people around you.
GJDailleult at 07:28 AM JST - 28th March

Get over it and respect the people around you.

Respect has to go both ways. Otherwise it is all just bullying and intimidation.
Kanadjin at 07:28 AM JST - 28th March

In Okinawa none of the teachers stood. They didn't stand because the teachers feel that nationalism is dangerous and can lead to the same atrocities which brought World War two. And as Okinawa was completely devastated by the war it makes complete sense to me.
likeitis at 07:34 AM JST - 28th March

but it is rational to ask the plaintiffs as public servants to engage in uniform activities at school ceremonies

Well, if they ask me to participate in an orgy at the next ceremony, I might just have to refuse, even if it is uniform. I bet in that case they will start citing my constitutional rights.

Standing is simply a show of respect. If you can't even respect the government of the country you live in it might be better to emigrate.

The song does not represent the government. It represents Japan. That includes the people of Japan. And these ARE Japanese people. So would you say they are disrespecting themselves? Hardly. They object to the song, and they have good reason.

Imagine if the anthem of Russia still contained lyrics about Soviet pride and glory! The Russians changed the words of their anthem, and so should the Japanese.