2016年 ILO条約勧告適用専門家委員会レポート
http://www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=1000:13100:0::NO:13100:P13100_COMMENT_ID:3256111Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2015, published 105th ILC session (2016)
Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29) - Japan (Ratification: 1932)
「Victims of wartime sexual slavery or industrial forced labour」つまり、従軍慰安婦と強制連行・強制労働被害者に関する記載です。2015年の時点での記載なので、2012年の韓国大法院による差戻審（a decision of the Korean Supreme Court of Justice passed on 24 May 2012 which reversed the decisions of lower courts rejecting the demands for compensation by forced labour victims against two leading Japanese industries）についてはもちろん、その後の高裁判決（the Retrial Courts (the Seoul and Pusan High Courts of Justice) ordered the companies to pay compensation to former victims of forced labour）についても言及されています。
委員会は最後にこのように述べています。
The Committee expresses the firm hope that, given the seriousness and long-standing nature of the case, the Government will make every effort to achieve reconciliation with the victims, and that measures will be taken, without further delay, to respond to the expectations and claims made by the aged surviving victims of wartime industrial forced labour and military sexual slavery.
http://www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=1000:13100:0::NO:13100:P13100_COMMENT_ID:3256111
「the Government will make every effort to achieve reconciliation with the victims」つまり被害者と和解すべくあらゆる努力を行うことを日本政府に対して、ILOの条約勧告適用専門家委員会は望んだわけですが、それに対する日本の安倍政権の対応は、被告企業に対して和解を拒否するよう圧力をかけ、その当然の結末として韓国大法院で敗訴すると、今度は「首相 「徴用工」判決「あらゆる手段使い きぜんと対応」」と言って、裁判所の賠償命令に従わないことを被告企業に要請したわけです。
その挙句に安倍政権の外務大臣はこんなことを言い出します。
「「徴用工」判決 「国際社会への挑戦」と批判 河野外相」
国際労働機関の条約勧告適用専門家委員会が日本も批准している強制労働条約を踏まえて日本政府に対して強制連行・強制労働被害者との和解への努力を求めたことを踏まえると、「国際社会への挑戦」しているのはむしろ安倍政権の方としか思えないんですけどね。
首相・官房長官・外相に対してILO見解を踏まえた質問をぶつけることを日本の記者に求めるのは、今や高望み過ぎるんですかねぇ。
Articles 1(1), 2(1) and 25 of the Convention. 1. Victims of wartime sexual slavery or industrial forced labour. The Committee recalls that it has been examining since 1995 the issues of wartime industrial forced labour and sexual slavery (so called “comfort women”) during the Second World War. While recalling that it did not have power to order relief, the Committee expressed the firm hope that the Government would continue to make further efforts to achieve reconciliation with the victims, and that measures would be taken without further delay to respond to the claims being made by the aged surviving victims of wartime industrial forced labour and military sexual slavery.
http://www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=1000:13100:0::NO:13100:P13100_COMMENT_ID:3256111
The Committee notes that the AJSEU provides information on legal decisions in the Republic of Korea and China concerning wartime industrial forced labour. The AJSEU refers in particular to a decision of the Korean Supreme Court of Justice passed on 24 May 2012 which reversed the decisions of lower courts rejecting the demands for compensation by forced labour victims against two leading Japanese industries. Following this decision, the Retrial Courts (the Seoul and Pusan High Courts of Justice) ordered the companies to pay compensation to former victims of forced labour. The AJSEU indicates that regrettably the defendants filed an appeal to the Supreme Court of Justice, which means that plaintiffs who have since passed away will not know the outcome of their complaint. A number of law suits have been filed recently in relation to wartime industrial forced labour following the retrial judgment of the Supreme Court of Justice. The AJSEU further indicates that officials of these companies declared that they considered that the issue of compensation had been settled by the conclusion of the 1965 Agreement on the Settlement of Problems Concerning Property and Claims and on Economic Cooperation between Japan and the Republic of Korea, for which reason they filed the appeal. The union considers that common awareness is developing that the issue should be solved for the sake of maintaining good relations with long time business partners. The AJSEU believes that the issue should be settled while the victims are still alive and that the Government of Japan has the responsibility of ensuring good relations between its Asian neighbours and the people of Japan. The Union adds that a number of law suits have been filed against the Government of Japan and/or industries in China after the “First Middle Court” in Beijing accepted a complaint in this regard. Finally, the AJSEU points out that the issue of military sexual slavery continues to be examined by United Nations human rights bodies.
The Government indicates in its report that it has no intention of denying or trivializing the “comfort women” issue, which was a grave affront to the honour and dignity of a large number of women. The Government remains committed to the official position on this matter and has already expressed sincere apologies and remorse to the former “comfort women”. The people and Government of Japan cooperated to establish the Asian Women’s Fund (AWF) in 1995 to extend atonement from the Japanese people to the former “comfort women” and to ensure that their sincere feelings of apologies and remorse would reach the former “comfort women” to the greatest extent possible. The AWF gave atonement money from private sector donations to 285 women. The Government also refers once again to the letters of apologies and remorse signed by the Prime Minister, which were sent to the “comfort women” who received atonement money. The AWF also provided funds for medical and welfare support projects. After the completion of the last project in Indonesia, the AWF was dissolved in March 2007, but the Government has continued to implement follow-up activities. As part of this follow up, the Government reiterates that it entrusted the people who were involved in the AWF to implement visiting care activities and group counselling activities, which took place in 2015. The Government also points out that former “comfort women” who received or wanted to receive benefits from the AWF were subject to “harassment” from certain groups in the Republic of Korea. It was regrettable that not all the former “comfort women” benefited from the activities of the AWF owing to these circumstances. The Government considers that the efforts of the AWF should be recognized appropriately.
The Government adds that it has sincerely dealt with the issues of reparations, property and claims relating to the Second World War, including those related to the issue of “comfort women”, in accordance with its obligations under the San Francisco Peace Treaty. The issues of claims by individuals have been legally settled with the parties to these treaties, in particular the 1965 Agreement on the Settlement of Problems concerning Property and Claims and on Economic Cooperation between Japan and the Republic of Korea. In conclusion, the Government expresses concern at the dissemination of information and figures among the international community which lack corroborative evidence. The Government expresses the hope that Japan’s efforts are correctly recognized by the international community based on a correct recognition of the facts. Finally, the Government states that there were no court decisions regarding the “comfort women” and the “conscripted forced labourers” issues, nor any cases pending in Japanese courts between 2012 and 2015.
While observing the Government’s statement in reply to its earlier request for certain follow-up activities to be undertaken by the AWF to meet the “comfort women”, the Committee notes with deep concern that no concrete outcome has been achieved. The Committee expresses the firm hope that, given the seriousness and long-standing nature of the case, the Government will make every effort to achieve reconciliation with the victims, and that measures will be taken, without further delay, to respond to the expectations and claims made by the aged surviving victims of wartime industrial forced labour and military sexual slavery.
