Constitutional Law - Japan Compliance

Japan Compliance

Constitutional Law

A collection of 6 posts

Slide summarising 2023 Supreme Court ruling on transgender restroom access: legal test for restrictions, abuse-of-discretion finding, and employer compliance steps.

Labor & Employment Law

Inclusion on Trial: Japan’s Supreme Court Upholds Transgender Employee Restroom Rights

TL;DR * Japan’s Supreme Court (11 Jul 2023) ruled that banning a transgender civil-servant from nearby women’s restrooms was an abuse of discretion. * Vague “discomfort” of colleagues is not a lawful basis for restrictions; employers must rely on concrete evidence and explore less-restrictive measures. * The decision raises the

Japan’s Supreme Court Ends Surgery Requirement for Legal Gender Change: What It Means for Employers

Constitutional Law

Japan’s Supreme Court Ends Surgery Requirement for Legal Gender Change: What It Means for Employers

TL;DR * On 25 Oct 2023 the Supreme Court struck down the Civil Code surgery requirement (GID Act Art.3 ①④) as unconstitutional. * Courts must now accept gender-marker changes without sterilisation surgery; detailed criteria will be set by lower courts. * Employers and schools should update HR, facility‐use and privacy policies

Slide summary: Constitutional and privacy challenges to Japan’s DBS Law—Article 13 proportionality, due-process safeguards, business risks

Constitutional Law

Constitutional Challenges on the Horizon? Privacy Concerns Surrounding Japan's DBS Law

TL;DR: Critics say Japan’s DBS Law risks over-collection and indefinite storage of criminal records, potentially violating Article 13 privacy rights. Constitutional challenges will likely hinge on proportionality, purpose limitation, and due-process safeguards. Businesses should prepare for stricter data-handling obligations and possible injunction scenarios. Table of Contents 1. Introduction:

Slide summarising the 2012 Old Age Addition case: phased abolition, two-prong process review, Article 25 implications

Japan's Supreme Court Upholds Welfare Benefit Cut: The 2012 Old Age Addition Case

TL;DR: The 2012 Old Age Addition case upheld the phased abolition of an extra welfare payment for seniors, confirming broad ministerial discretion under the Public Assistance Act and Article 25. The Court set a two-prong “process review” test: (1) rationality of need/adequacy assessment and (2) fairness of transitional

Slide summarising the 1982 Horiki Litigation: legislative discretion, non-combination of benefits, Article 25 threshold ‘markedly lacking in rationality’

The Horiki Litigation: Legislative Discretion and Social Security Benefits in Japan

TL;DR: The 1982 Horiki Litigation reaffirmed broad legislative discretion under Article 25, upholding a statutory “non-combination clause” that barred simultaneous receipt of a Disability Welfare Pension and a Child Rearing Allowance. The Supreme Court set a high bar—“markedly lacking in rationality”—for striking down social-security legislation. Table of

Slide summarising the 1967 Asahi Litigation: Article 25 abstract right, ministerial discretion, non-inheritability of welfare claims

Asahi Litigation (1967): Supreme Court on Japan’s Constitutional Right to Welfare

TL;DR: The 1967 Asahi Litigation confirmed that Article 25 provides only an abstract constitutional right, upheld broad ministerial discretion over welfare standards, and ruled such entitlements are strictly personal and non-inheritable. Table of Contents 1. Background of the Case 2. The Supreme Court’s Judgment: Procedural Termination 3. Dissenting