The Constitutional Court has ushered in a new phase in the long-running dispute between Seoul and Tokyo over compensation of Korean “comfort women” and nuclear bomb victims for their suffering and human rights abuses during Japan’s colonial rule of Korea.
On Tuesday, the court ruled on a petition filed in 2006 by a group of 109 comfort women ― a euphemism for wartime sex slaves. The women wanted to know whether the Seoul government violated their basic rights ― and by extension the Constitution ― by failing to make efforts to help them settle their disputes with the Tokyo government.
After five years of review, the court reached a decision in favor of the petitioners. It unequivocally said the Korean government’s inaction was unconstitutional because it meant the government failed to fulfill its legal obligation to help the petitioners pursue their property rights, human dignity and personal freedom.
The court reached a similar verdict on a separate petition filed in 2008 by some 2,500 Korean victims of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
These rulings dealt a serious blow to the Seoul government by making its stance on the matter untenable. It has thus far refrained from confronting Tokyo over the compensation problem due to concern that doing so would strain relations with its neighbor.
Seoul officials tend to think that demanding compensation for the comfort women and nuclear bomb victims amounts to demanding a renegotiation of the 1965 agreement that Korea and Japan made to settle all claims between the two countries stemming from Japan’s 1910-45 colonial rule.
But this view is erroneous because the 1965 agreement does not cover the issues related to the comfort women and atomic bomb victims. These problems began to surface long after the agreement was signed.
Furthermore, the agreement itself states that when any dispute arises concerning its interpretation or implementation, the two sides should settle it primarily through diplomatic channels and, if such efforts fail, by forming an arbitral commission.
Citing these clauses, the court stressed in its ruling the need for the Seoul government to exert diplomatic efforts to resolve the matter on behalf of the victims.
Following the court’s verdict, the Seoul government said it would consider proposing diplomatic talks with Japan to deal with the problem. But it is questionable if Tokyo would accept the proposal for talks, given its insistence that all claims were settled with Korea by the 1965 agreement.
Hence, Seoul officials also need to review the option of brining the case to an arbitral panel. According to the agreement, either side can submit a dispute to an arbitral commission for decision. An arbitral panel consists of three arbitrators ― one each from the two countries and the third from a neutral country.
Even if the Seoul government steps up diplomatic efforts, the chances are low that Tokyo would change its stance. Nevertheless, Seoul officials need to use all the diplomatic channels available and the international stage to press its case.
They need to hurry, given that most victims are elderly and may not live long enough to receive compensation or an apology from Japan. According to the Foreign Ministry, of the 234 comfort women registered with the government, 165 have already died, with only 69 still surviving.
