Constitutional Law - Japan Compliance

Japan Compliance

Constitutional Law

A collection of 12 posts

Global comparison of same-sex partnership rights: Japan’s local certificates vs Taiwan’s marriage law and corporate HR best practices

Labor & Employment Law

Same-Sex Couples in Japan: HR, Visa and Equality Issues for Global Employers

TL;DR * Japan still lacks national recognition of same-sex marriage; rights depend on patchy local partnership systems and corporate policies. * Courts are split on constitutionality, while Taiwan’s 2019 legislation offers a contrasting Asian model. * Multinationals must bridge legal gaps through inclusive HR benefits, visa support and clear communication. Table

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:

One-slide summary illustration of the 1958 Supreme Court decision upholding compulsory National Health Insurance in Japan

Japan’s Supreme Court Upholds Compulsory National Health Insurance (1958)

TL;DR In 1958 the Japanese Supreme Court’s Grand Bench ruled that municipalities can mandate National Health Insurance enrollment and premiums without violating constitutional rights. Citing public welfare and mutual aid, the Court rejected claims under Articles 19 and 29 and confirmed the procedural validity of Ogi Town’s

Summary slide: 2017 Supreme Court ruling on survivor pensions – age rule for widowers, Article 14 equality test, key holdings and implications

Japan Supreme Court 2017 Survivor‑Pension Case: Why Age Rules for Widowers Survived an Equality Challenge

TL;DR Japan’s Supreme Court (Mar 21 2017) upheld a Local Government Officials Accident Compensation Act rule that denies survivor pensions to husbands under 55, finding the gender‑based age threshold “not irrational” given labour‑market disparities. The Court applied a deferential Horiki‑style review under Article 14, leaving

Slide summarizing Japan Supreme Court’s 2001 ruling that the Public Assistance Act excludes undocumented foreign residents, key holdings and constitutional context

Japan Supreme Court on Public Assistance for Undocumented Foreign Residents (2001)

TL;DR Japan’s Supreme Court (Sept 25 2001) held that undocumented foreign residents are not legally entitled to benefits under the Public Assistance Act. Relying on Horiki precedent, the Court ruled that (i) Article 25 imposes only a programmatic duty subject to broad legislative discretion, (ii) excluding undocumented residents

Infographic summarizing Japan’s 2007 Supreme Court ruling on student disability pensions

Student Disability Pension Gap: Why Japan’s Supreme Court Backed Voluntary Enrollment (2007)

TL;DR Japan’s Supreme Court (2007) upheld the constitutionality of the pre‑1989 National Pension framework that left some students disabled after age 20 without benefits. The Court applied an extremely deferential “markedly irrational” standard, ruled no violation of Articles 14 or 25 of the Constitution, and emphasized legislative

One‑slide summary showing Japan Supreme Court’s 2023 ruling on pension cuts: elimination of 2.5 % special‑measure level, rationale of fiscal sustainability and inter‑generational fairness.

Japan Supreme Court 2023 Pension‑Cut Ruling: Balancing Sustainability and Recipient Rights

TL;DR * In December 2023 Japan’s Supreme Court upheld the 2012 law phasing out a 2.5 % “special‑measure” pension surplus. * The Court applied the Horiki standard: legislation is invalid only if “markedly irrational.” * Key justifications: inter‑generational fairness, fiscal sustainability, and restoring the macro‑economic slide. * Challenges based

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