Explanation of issues
Explanation of issues in the draft revision of the Family Law in the 8 March 2024 Cabinet decision.
As of March 2024, the long-standing practice in Japan of "abduction and separation of biological children by one parent, and separation of children from their biological parents by temporary custody of Child Guidance Centers" is a massive human rights violation that will go down in the history of the earth. The draft revision of the Family Law, approved by the Cabinet on 8th March 2024, also pretends to resolve Japan's brazen violations of international law and repeated recommendations by various commissions, and strengthen the violations.
This reality is a new form of discrimination against the left behind parents and their children, called Japan's "hostage justice" system.
It can be seen as a new form of racism, and the victims are the actual abused children, the parents whose children were taken away and their genetic children. The damage continues to grow, with many deaths.
One reason is that in Japan, children are not saved from abuse, which should be properly and promptly investigated and intervened with police authority as a crime.
This is because child abuses are generally handled by a complex staff of child guidance centres and child and family support centres, they are generally not equipped with the proper authority and capacity to deal with such cases.
This is also a violation of recommendation by CCPR; [The state party should also ensure that all reports of abuse are thoroughly investigated and that such investigations lead to appropriate sanctions where warranted.]
*「CCPR/C/JPN/CO/7, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, paragraph 35」
This situation continues under the legally baseless claim that "the law does not enter the home. This is also the reason for the prevalence of "false domestic violence," in which a parent who removes a child from his or her home can be exclusively granted sole custody of the child by the judiciary and the government, based solely on his or her report.
In addition, the world-famous "parental child abduction" and "temporary custody by child guidance centres," which violate human rights by keeping children separated from one or both of their genetic parents, generate huge subsidies for shelters which are one of the places where children are abducted, and single-parent support groups. And the operation of subsidies is inherently problematic.
The Japanese Diet, House of Representatives Legal Affairs Committee have confirmed that "kidnapping of a biological child" is even subject to Article 224 of the Penal Code of Japan, which provides that "kidnapping of a biological child" is a crime of abduction and kidnapping of a minor.
However, to the best of my knowledge, there have been very few cases of "kidnapping of a biological child" referred to the police for prosecution over the past 10 years, and not a single case of prosecution of such a case has been filed by the prosecutors.
And even though left behind parents have all the legal rights as parents, from the moment their children are taken away, the administration of day-care centres and schools widely denies them the right to interact with their children at day-care centres and schools without the consent of the parent who took them away.
Children taken by "parental child abduction" continue to be separated from left behind parent for an extended period until they reach a state of "Parental Alienation Syndrome," a condition in which the child is unable to express his or her desire to spend time with the parent from whom he or she has been removed, either judicially or administratively. The child's inability to express his or her desire to spend time with the parent from whom he or she has been removed is then recognized by the judiciary as an expression of the child's desire not to spend time with the parent from whom he or she has been removed, and as a decision that respects the "best interests of the child" in accordance with the "child's right to express his or her own opinion. The judiciary defends only the parent who committed the abduction, and the judicial process is also kept secret. This is in violation of the right to a fair trial under Article 14 of CCPR.
And as a result for children, it is not possible in many cases to be in the same local nursery or school immediately afterwards and also as a transitional process.
It has been a longstanding finding of the international community that children who lose co-parenting have a much higher probability of suicide and other difficulties as a result, but I also shared with you that the proper statistics about this issue in Japan are also questionable on the bases of international methodologies from this perspective.
According to the following data
https://www.timetoputkidsfirst.org/why-children-need-shared-parenting
based on studies generally accepted worldwide, which were submitted to the UN Human Rights Council, children who lose co-parenting result in
- 63% of young suicides
- 85% of youth incarceration
- 85% of children with behavioural disorders
- 75% of young people in rehabilitation for drug disorders
- 71% of high school dropouts.
Last month, in February 2024, the Japanese government announced a policy to revise the Family Law in order to improve this situation. The main purpose of this policy is to include the relationship between the parents, such as mutual respect between both parents, as a factor for the court to decide custody of a child, and to continue the current judicial practice whereby parents who have "abducted,kidnapped" their own children because they do not have a good relationship with each other are considered sole caregivers.
The common practice in the world of shared custody is, in other words, both biological parents give cares separately and evenly. Just with shared custody plan that how children move between both parents. In many cases, the parents of children are divorced because they can no longer live together and cooperate. It is nonsense to include the relationship between the parents as a factor in the court's decision whether to provide sole or joint custody for the children. No country does so. Moreover, as we all know, studies around the world have proven that it is beneficial to a child's life to maintain a relationship with each of his or her genetic parents, regardless of whether or not the parents are in conflict.
The main purpose of the Family Law amendment announced by the Japanese government is to strengthen the huge "child abduction" and "separation of children from their biological parents" business in Japan, including the fact that a portion of child support is paid to lawyers as compensation. Obviously, having lawyer receive a portion of the child support as compensation will lead to less money being spent on the child. As for child support, as is done in other countries, City Hall and other government, in cooperation with the tax office, should adjust the difference in assets and income between the parents in the context of joint custody. It is a social loss for the judiciary to intervene in the normal course of business about child support. (except for the execution of payments by law court.)
By formally making co-parenting an option that can be decided by the court, the Japanese government is pretending that it has solved the "child abduction issue in Japan", but it also effectively reinforces the hostage justice system in which lawyers continue to stage marital disputes and show that the child does not adore one parent under the influence of Parental Alienation Syndrome after longtime separation from left behind parents, and hold the child hostage to negotiate financial terms. The hostage justice system will be effectively strengthened.
To resolve this issue;
・Japan must ensure that all reports of abuse are thoroughly investigated (by the police under the appropriate trainings) and that investigations lead to appropriate sanctions when abuse is found.
・As stated in the CRC, the CCPR, and the recommendations that conform to them, Japan must ensure all parents and children are not separated except for the period of abuse that has been determined as a crime, neglect, and the situation that the relationship cannot be maintained geographically. Also, to abandon the judicial system that routinely separates both genetic parents from their children.
・The Child Guidance Center and the Child and Family Support Center shall not provide "temporary custody" except in the cases of criminal abuse or neglect, which have been determined as crimes.
・The judicial system should be such that layers do not receive compensation for child support or for the adjustment of child support.
Kenjiro Hara