Issues: Comfort Women
The term "comfort women" was used during WWII to refer to women
who were conscripted to provide sexual service to the Japanese Imperial Army at
comfort stations throughout East Asia. Japanese, Korean, Chinese made up most of
the comfort women, but they also included other Asians as well as the Dutch.
Estimates of their total number vary greatly, ranging from under 20,000 to
around 200,000.
Though known to many during or after the war, the comfort women issue bursted
into international attention in 1991, when Kim Hak-soon of South Korea became
the first former comfort woman to testify publicly. This event quickly led to an
international movement that demanded the Japanese government to apologize and
compensate for what it considered to be sexual slavery. In 1996, the U.N. Human
Rights Commission issued a report on the matter, based largely on testimony from
witnesses and victimized comfort women themselves. The report has been
criticized by some historians in Japan who dismiss the relevant testimony as
unreliable and insist that the comfort women were not forcibly recruited or
abducted.
Numerous lawsuits have been filed since 1991 by former comfort women in Japanese
courts, as well as one in the United States, demanding compensation and an
official apology from the government of Japan.
All lawsuits are filed on the basis that the Japanese government violated
numerous international treaties which protect civilians in military-occupied
territories and prohibit trafficking in persons (i.e. The Hague Convention). The
lawsuits state that the women had been either abducted from their hometowns or
tricked into serving in 'comfort stations.' They emphasize extremely poor living
conditions and sexual, as well as psychological, abuse suffered by the women,
which had a lasting impact.
The Japan side argues: 1) Japan is subject to sovereign immunity; 2) Japan had
already settled its war crime compensation issues by signing the San Francisco
Peace Treaty in 1951 and other bilateral treaties with the countries involved;
3) individual victims' claims for damages are not acceptable under international
law, since such compensation can only be, and was, carried out on a
government-to-government basis; and 4) Japan has no legal obligation to
compensate the victims due to the expiration of the 20-year statute of
limitations.
Some cases have been dismissed while others are still pending. So far, there has
been one ruling by a Japanese court which stipulated that compensation be
awarded to the women. It was overturned in March 2001.
The Japanese government initially denied any involvement in setting up and
operating “comfort stations” in Asia. In 1992 it admitted its official
involvement and offered an apology after evidence was unearthed by Japanese
historian Yoshimi Yoshiaki. In 1995, the Asian Women’s Fund (AWF) was
established in Japan, based on a decision by the Japanese government, to raise
money from individuals to compensate former comfort women. The Japanese
government provided part of the funds. As of June 2002, 285 women had accepted
the compensation of around 4 million yen together with a letter from the
Japanese Prime Minister. Many declined, however, since the money came from
private individuals and not from the Japanese government. In addition, 79 women
in Holland received medical and welfare assistance from the Japanese government.
AWF will be disbanded in 2007, after the completion of its project in Indonesia.
Below are presented both sides of the issue, including summaries of cases being
filed by the former comfort women, and where available, official court
documents. Otherwise, newspaper reports and scholarly works are relied on to
gather the facts presented. As with all aspects of this website, any recent
information or corrections concerning the data listed are welcome.
