Justice for 'comfort women' in Korea is long overdue

However, no treaty resulted. Still, Japan was one of 15 commission members, so it was well aware that other nations regarded sexual slavery as a crime against humanity.

Second, trafficking was already prohibited internationally by the Trafficking Convention of 1904. Moreover, Japan signed the 1910 International Convention For The Suppression Of The White Slave Traffic (a term that refers to sexual slavery, not the race of victims). This treaty outlawed those who “by fraud or by the use of violence, threats, abuse of authority, or any other means of constraint, hired, abducted or enticed (victims for) immoral purposes.”

Japan also signed the 1921 International Convention For The Suppression Of The Traffic In Women And Children. Under both treaties, all women regardless of nationality or location were to be protected from white slavery. But the 1921 treaty did offer exemptions in the “colonies, overseas possessions, protectorates or territories under (a colonial power's) sovereignty or authority.”

Thus, Japan might have had that right within the borders of Korea itself — but not over Koreans per se. Once the Japanese government shipped Korean women out of Korea for its brothels in Southeast Asia or China, it was acting criminally.

Third, already in 1911, Japan had ratified the Hague Convention of 1907 regarding the laws of war. This treaty prohibited invading armies from enslaving civilians and belligerents.

Then there was the 1929 Geneva Convention Relative To The Treatment Of Prisoners Of War, which held that captured belligerents may not be forced into “unhealthful or dangerous work.” Being repeatedly raped would likely count as dangerous work even if the women could ever be counted as captured belligerents.

Finally, Japan signed the 1930 Convention Concerning Forced Labour, which did exempt “any work or service exacted in ... emergency ... war or ... calamity.” But it must be extracted from only “adult able-bodied males” for 60 days or less. So even under this treaty's provisions, Japan's system of sexual slavery was illegal.

Japan's wartime government must have known that its brothels were illegal. Yet at the International Military Tribunal for the Far East held in Tokyo from 1946 to 1948, the victors prosecuted only those who had waged war. That is, while crimes against peace were prosecuted, those against humanity, including these hapless female victims, went unpunished.

Yet based on the legal norms then, post-war tribunals could have afforded them justice. After all, the Batavia Military Tribunal of 1948 did prosecute Japanese soldiers who had raped white Dutch “comfort women” in Indonesia. Three were executed and 13 convicted.

However, the very same tribunal would not look into similar cases of Asian “comfort women” who had also been repeatedly raped in the same country. Unless a victim's race still matters today, surely Korean survivors deserve some justice now before they all pass away.

1|2

SharePrintEmail

Write a Comment

Enter your comments - 3000 characters max

Type in image code

Submit

 Receive China Post promos Respond to this email