Court rejects suit by teachers who refused to stand up for anthem

Thursday 26th February, 03:47 PM 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 30 Total Comments Show All

BurakuminDes at 12:23 AM JST - 27th February

Japan should probably have changed their national anthem post-WW2 to avoid such controversies. If people are ashamed of it, what is the point of calling it a "National Anthem", and forcing government workers to stand up and sing it? Dump it.
knews at 12:41 AM JST - 27th February

An interesting dilemma. It's just a song...but, at the same time, a way of showing one's nationalistic pride. The tune was actually written by a British man and then a new version was created by a German! It is still played at the end of every sumo tournament but I wonder if everyone stands up when it is played then. Maybe it is time for a new anthem to be made, one that doesn't have any connections to the war etc.
GW at 12:44 AM JST - 27th February

I wonder if judges will have to stand & sing this ditty & like it.

seesaw, Jpn even after 6decades hasnt come to grips with its actions of the 1930-40s, thats why this is happening, many japanese arent happy about what their leaders did & the anthem & flag were used during those years to rally the natives, it carries a lot of baggage that Japan as a country just refuses to deal with, with the odd exception, these teachers being an example
donkusai at 12:56 AM JST - 27th February

The Hinomaru and Kimigayo are, in many respects, the Japanese equivalent to the Nazi swastika. They were the symbols of the ultra-nationalists in the long lead-up to WW2 and made illegal after the war by the U.S. occupational force. The Kimigayo praises the Emperor and calls for his reign to last forever (or something like that), where the constitution clearly removes the Emperor from the realms of god-hood. This is what the teachers are protesting when they refuse to sing. On one side, the song is most likely unconstitutional, and on the other, it is a symbol of bad times that the teachers don't want to see repeated.

So, it essentially was removed after WW2, but the likes of the LDP and Ishihara and co. have been pushing for its reinstatement for years. In the bigger picture, it's all tied in with the Yasakuni shrine issue and the black vans and historical revisionism, especially in school textbooks, that has been going on. The teachers should be supported as one of the few organisations with the power and the will to stand up against the likes of Ishihara and his ilk.
TheQuestion at 01:19 AM JST - 27th February

This is more of an internal issue. If a school requires its teachers to stand for the national anthem its virtually the same as a school policy requiring them to file lesson plans. Perhapse the issue at hand is more complicated, but I think not.
Soochi at 01:56 AM JST - 27th February

This is the first time I have seen a court turn a "social courtesy" into a compulsory contractual obligation. I'd sooner take pride in the fact that my country's courts protect its citizens' rights to choose not to stand for the anthem rather than forcing them to do so. The reasons why someone would decide to stand or sit are completely immaterial.
donkusai at 02:28 AM JST - 27th February

TheQuestion, just some background. The teachers in the past who have gone through this have made it clear that they are protesting against being forced to stand and sing the Kimigayo, that the issue is not at the local level but is coming down from city/prefectural governments. They're losing their constitutional right of freedom of speech (or not to speak) by being forced to sing something that is most likely unconstitutional.
herefornow at 06:21 AM JST - 27th February

Soochi -- Great point. During the 60's -- not the best time in history for my country -- people were burning flags in protest of a war, and, blacks were refusing to acknowledge the national anthem as well. And, in most cases, the courts protected their rights to do so, as an expression of free speach. A "constitution" is meaningless if it does not guarantee this basic right. And, if those silly sound trucks can drive around blaring their nonsense at clearly illegal noise levels, how come these folks cannot even express their views in a silent manner?
GJDailleult at 09:33 AM JST - 27th February

Chalk up another one for the history revisionists, in their never-ending battle to distort the WW2 record. For those posters who seem unable to understand that this is what the issue is about, perhaps they should be banned from this site. But don't worry, that would ‘‘not infringe on the freedom of thought and consciousness.’’ It would be ‘no more than a social courtesy’ for them to stop posting opinions that I disagree with.
Scrote at 09:51 AM JST - 27th February

I suppose the teachers still have the option to sing out of key and out of time with the music.
NashBridges at 10:48 AM JST - 27th February

That's just typical Hiroshima for you. Making sense of most governmental decisions make around here would require require you to think on the level of a brain dead monkey.
seesaw at 11:52 AM JST - 27th February

shoganaika: what is your point exactly? let me guess....love it or leave it?

Yea...exactly!..:) love it or leave it.
Kameleon at 07:15 PM JST - 27th February

Have to agree with the judge that it is simply a social courtesy. We do things we disagree with everyday that are no doubt far more personally challenging than merely standing to the song of your country. They don't even have to sing the silly song.
mareo2 at 07:36 PM JST - 27th February

I wish that we can have a new flag an anthem, one that represent more the modern peaceful J.
shouganaika at 11:17 PM JST - 28th February

Yea...exactly!..:) love it or leave it.

if you believe that sentiment then you deserve all the bad treatment you are ever going to receive from anybody, anyplace, anywhere. if you don't like it, you can leave