Catalysts of Justice: The Impact of the Tokyo Women’s Tribunal on the Comfort Women Issue

Author: Myfanwy Sequeira, LLM

April 17, 2025

“He waved a knife at me and threatened to kill me if I didn’t do what he said…he stabbed me...I was taken to the infirmary...[and]... was treated... for twenty days. I was sent back to my room. A soldier who had just returned from the fighting came in. … he seized my wrists and threw me out of the room. My wrists were broken… There’s no bone here. I was kicked by a soldier here. It took the skin right off... you could see the bone.”

- Kimiko Kaneda, South Korea, The Oral History of Former Comfort Women[1]

Introduction

In the tumult of World War II, approximately 200,000 women endured atrocities that were similar to those against Kimiko Kaneda. Ms. Kaneda is a survivor of the comfort system, a systematic framework institutionalizing sexual violence against women. Its survivors, grappling with profound physical and emotional traumas, have been fighting for acknowledgment and redress for decades.

However, the Japanese government has refused to accept liability. When international institutions failed to deliver justice, private citizens defiantly stepped forward to fill the enforcement gap by establishing the Tokyo Women’s Tribunal. This essay examines its crucial role in spotlighting the plight of comfort women. First, it surveys the history and statistics on comfort women. This essay analyses the legal impact of the Tokyo Women Tribunal’s judgments in the legal realm despite their non-legal and non-binding nature. The essay concludes optimistically, arguing that the people’s tribunal serves as a catalyst for justice when established institutions fail to hold wrongdoers accountable.

A former "comfort woman" stands by a memorial statue symbolizing women like her, forced to work in the Japanese military's wartime brothels. Seoul, South Korea 2019 [Image source: Kyodo News]

History of Comfort Women

From 1932 to 1945, the Japanese Imperial Army, in conjunction with the Japanese Government, implemented a comfort system, forcing many to become “comfort women”[2]. Comfort stations, or military brothels, were established in regions where the Japanese military was deployed. They were notably present in various territories, including China, Taiwan, Borneo, the Philippines, the Pacific Islands, Singapore, Malaysia, Burma, Indonesia, and Japan[3]. Comfort stations functioned as domiciles for “military sexual slaves”[4]  for the military and the government. They were intended to mitigate the sexual violence inflicted upon local women by Japanese soldiers[5], prevent venereal diseases among the troops[6], generate revenue[7], safeguard against espionage[8], provide stress relief, and maintain morale among the troops[9].

Initially, the recruitment of comfort women was restricted to voluntary engagement by sex workers[10]. However, the demand surpassed the availability of willing individuals. Hence, the Japanese government and military resorted to deceitful tactics, offering false employment opportunities in factories and restaurants with lucrative salaries and coercing the recruits into sexual labor in comfort camps[11]. Eventually, recruitment evolved into large-scale abduction using coercion and threats of physical harm against the women and their families[12]. These women were registered as “units of munitions or canteen supplies” on their travel list[13], issued military travel documents[14] , and transported by the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

The Japanese military strategy of July 1941 set the ratio of comfort women to soldiers at 1 to 35[15]. More than 200,000 women were coerced into sexual slavery in the comfort stations scattered across Asia[16]. Among them, approximately 100,000 were transported to Pacific islands; some were as young as 11, as soldiers favored younger women and even girls[17]. Furthermore, a significant portion, as much as up to 70 percent, of the comfort women perished on the battlefield[18].

Delivering Justice?

Following the war, the Allied Powers established the Tokyo War Crimes Tribunal, or the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, to try individuals for war crimes. The War Crimes Tribunal handled cases involving crimes against peace, crimes against humanity and violations of laws and customs[19]. Yet, it overlooked the issue of comfort women and the atrocities they endured, primarily due to political motives[20].

Still, several cases were presented in Japan’s domestic courts regarding the plight of comfort women. In 1991, a class action lawsuit was initiated by three comfort women, with an additional six joining in 1992[21]. In 1993, comfort women from the Philippines filed a lawsuit seeking redress for their suffering[22]. Another case was brought forth by a Dutch comfort woman in 1998[23]. Regrettably, all these cases were dismissed by the courts due to the expiration of the statute of limitations to bring such claims and the individual right to claim against Japan, as stipulated by post-war peace treaties and bilateral agreements[24]. Also, the courts (Supreme Court) viewed and analyzed the old constitutional laws and concluded that the Japanese government was legally within its rights to introduce such a system.

Finally, in 1998, a significant legal decision was made by the Yamaguchi District Court, awarding compensation to South Korean comfort women. This ruling was based on the Japanese government’s failure to adequately compensate these women for the violation of their constitutional rights. This decision was later overturned by the Hiroshima High Court in 2001, and the Japanese Supreme Court upheld this decision in 2003. Nevertheless, the Court recognized that the lack of education and memory failures among the comfort women did not undermine the establishment of facts[25], thus validating their experiences and confirming the credibility of their testimonies. Generally, the facts established in the lower courts are respected by higher courts unless contrary evidence emerges. As such, the Yamaguchi District Court’s recognition that the Japanese government established and operated the brothels marked a meaningful, albeit modest, step forward.

In addition to the Asian women, 35 Dutch women were coerced into prostitution in the comfort stations. The Dutch Military Tribunal, convened in 1948 in Batavia, did not overlook the plight of the Dutch comfort women[26]. The Japanese officers responsible for forcibly recruiting the 35 Dutch women were held accountable and prosecuted[27]. Article 11 of the San Francisco Peace Treaty with Japan stipulated that Japan would acknowledge the verdicts rendered by the Tokyo Tribunal and other courts established to prosecute war crimes. Consequently, Japan agreed to enforce the sentences imposed on Japanese nationals and refrain from granting pardons or parole without government approval[28].

The disparities in the rights between Asian comfort women and Dutch comfort women are significant. Japan admitted its wrongdoing in coercing Dutch women into prostitution and acknowledged their rape and mistreatment as unjust[29]. However, it remained silent on the crimes committed against Asian comfort women, which were not addressed or discussed during the prosecution by international military tribunals. Because the atrocities inflicted upon Asian comfort women were far more severe in terms of duration, severity, and number[30], it is essential to highlight Japan’s failure to address the issue of Asian comfort women, especially since the loss of freedom and autonomy for all comfort women fundamentally violates international law[31].

The argument aligns with John Stuart Mill’s theory regarding the subjugation of women, wherein he argued that the law has systematically oppressed women throughout history[32]. The circumstances surrounding the oversight of the comfort women’s tragedy, driven by underlying reasons and political entanglements, testify to the modern systematic oppression of women by international law. This is not to say that the law has never benefited women; instead, it highlights the recurring subjection of women in legal systems worldwide.

Tokyo Women’s Tribunal

In December 2000, the Women’s International War Crimes Tribunal on Japan’s Military Sexual Slavery, more commonly known as the Tokyo Women’s Tribunal, conducted a trial from the 8th to the 12th to address the sexual enslavement and exploitation of comfort women. The Women’s Tribunal was established by private citizens; as a result, the judgment was not enforceable or legally binding.

However, the establishment of this ad hoc tribunal, as stated by 10 prosecutors from various countries, was necessary due to the failure of international military tribunals to deliver justice, as they overlooked the systematic enslavement of women for sexual purposes through coercion and deceit[33]. The creation of the Women’s Tribunal was called an “act of defiance” by civil societies, given the official silence of countries on this matter[34] by Christine Chinkin, L. Bates Lea Global Professor of Law at the University of Michigan. The Women’s Tribunal was attended by 64 survivors of the comfort women system from over 20 countries[35]. The Japanese government was invited to participate but did not respond. As a result, the judges appointed amicus curiae[36] to make legal arguments on its behalf[37]. The Women’s Tribunal found Emperor Hirohito guilty of rape, trafficking, forced labor, slavery, and other crimes against humanity. Accordingly, it ordered the Japanese government to acknowledge its legal and moral responsibilities, issue apologies, and provide compensation to the victims of the comfort system[38].

While the judgment lacks legal enforceability and wields no direct authority, the Women’s Tribunal possesses indirect influence because it can issue recommendations to the Commission on Human Rights and United Nations members[39]. Moreover, it addresses enforcement gaps that perpetuate official silence and inaction. Currently, the international human rights system lacks a universal court or dispute resolution mechanism for individuals to bring forth human rights claims against another state[40]. Although the European Court of Human Rights, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, and the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights permit such claims, they are regional in nature[41]. Consequently, individuals from various parts of the world encounter logistical challenges that prevent them from pursuing such claims. The Women’s Tribunal serves to bridge this gap[42].

In its final verdict, the Tokyo Women’s Tribunal emphasized that in instances where states neglect their human rights obligations, it falls upon “the women and peoples of the world” to fill the gap and hold the responsible parties accountable[43]. It made concerted efforts to address the issue of comfort women formally, adhering to principles of legality and international fair trial standards. This approach facilitated engagement with victims’ concerns, enabled their participation in the justice process, and expressed the desire for a transformative change among those accountable[44]. In 2003, the International Labor Organization (ILO) cited the judgment of the Women’s Tribunal in its observation concerning Japan’s compliance with the Forced Labor Convention[45]. While the ILO pronounced that it had no mandate to rule on the legal issues, it confirmed that Japan was in breach of the ‘absolute prohibitions’ in the 1930 ILO Forced Labor Convention[46].

Finally, the tribunal exemplifies how civil society can influence state interests, facilitating broader discussions of women’s issues at the international level. According to the Realist theory, states rely on their strengths for survival, driving them to pursue power to safeguard their interests. However, civil society wields the potential to sway these interests by reintroducing anarchy into society[47].

The Women’s Tribunal serves as a prime example of this dynamic. Initially, the Tokyo War Crimes Tribunal in 1946 took a lenient stance in prosecuting Japan for war crimes, propelled by the United States’ agenda to modernize Japan and bolster its capitalist role, positioning Japan as a strategic counter to the spread of communism[48]. Then, the Women’s Tribunal in 2000 was not acknowledged by the Japanese government. Nevertheless, in 2007, a resolution in the House of Representatives recalled Japan’s backing of Resolution 1325 and the 1921 International Convention for the Suppression of Traffic in Women and Children. Given Japan’s historical support for uplifting women in armed conflict, this resolution urged Japan to formally apologize and acknowledge its “historical responsibility” for the forced sexual exploitation and slavery of comfort women[49]. Though the resolution did not explicitly reference the Tokyo Women’s Tribunal, it echoed its findings. Additionally, it stressed that both public and private officials had called for retracting Chief Cabinet Secretary Yohei Kono’s 1993 statement (Kono Statement). This Statement acknowledged the involvement of the Japanese military in the coercive recruitment of comfort women. However, it was criticized as government officials made multiple contradictory statements[50]. While this resolution indirectly acknowledges Japan’s efforts to address comfort women’s issues, it also reflects the evolving stance of the U.S. regarding this matter. There has been a notable transition from the U.S. avoiding the topic to actively seeking a formal apology from Japan. This shift has brought attention to comfort women’s issues,  positioning them as significant women’s legal concerns rather than a forgotten footnote in history.

Conclusion

In essence, the Tokyo Women’s Tribunal represents a commendable model that has brought to light the atrocities against comfort women. Despite its lack of legal authority, the Tribunal’s rulings have permeated legal discourse, opening up discussions on the human rights violations by the Japanese government. The Tribunal filled the void left by Japan’s historical failure to address these issues by providing a platform for survivors to share their experiences. It has bridged the enforcement gap, revealing the political constraints of traditional international justice systems. The Tribunal’s commendable courage in standing in solidarity with comfort women paves the way for greater justice and equity in the international arena.

---

Sources

Legislation

1. San Francisco Peace Treaty, 8th April 1952.

Cases

1. Asia-Pacific War Korean Victims’ Compensation Claims Case (Wa) No.17461, Judgement, 26th March 2001, Tokyo District Court.

2. The Prosecutors and the Peoples of the Asia-Pacific Region v Hirohito Emperor Showa et al., The Women’s International War Crimes Tribunal for the Trial of Japan’s Military Sexual Slavery, Case No, PT-2000-1-T, 31 January 2002.

Books

1. Boling, David. “Mass Rape, Enforced Prostitution, and the Japanese Imperial Army: Japan Eschews International Legal Responsibility?” (1995) 32 Colum. J. Transnational L. 533, 542.

2. Choi, Chungmoo. Introduction. In The Comfort Women: Colonialism, War, and Sex, edited by Chungmoo Choi. Duke University Press, 1997.

3. Hicks, George. The Comfort Women: Japan’s Brutal Regime of Enforced Prostitution In The Second World War (1994).

4. McDougall, G. J. (2013) Addressing State Responsibility for the Crime of Military Sexual Slavery during the Second World War: Further Attempts for Justice for the ‘Comfort Women’. Korean Journal of International and Comparative Law, Vol 1, No. 2, pp 137-165.

5. Mill, John Stuart. The Subjection of Women. John W. Parker and Son, 1869.

6. Piccigallo, P.R. The Japanese on Trial: Allied War Crimes Operations in the East, 1945-1951. University of Texas Press, 1979.

7. Tanaka, Yuki. Hidden Horrors: Japanese War Crimes In World War II (1996).

8. Tree, Timothy. “International Law: A Solution or a Hindrance towards Resolving the Asian Comfort Women Controversy?” (2000-01) 5 UCLA J. Int’l L. & Foreign Aff. 461, 468.

Journals

1. Arakawa, Maki. “A New Forum for Comfort Women: Fighting Japan in United States Federal Court.” (2001) 16 Berkeley Women’s L.J. 174, 177-78.

2. Chinkin, Christine M. “Women’s International Tribunal on Japanese Military Sexual Slavery.” (2001) 95 The American Journal of International Law 335, 337.

3. Say, Brooke. “Ripe for Justice: A New UN Tool to Strengthen the Position of the “Comfort Women” and to Corner Japan into its Reparation Responsibility.” (2005) 23 Penn St. Int’l L. Rev. 931, 963.

4. Simm, Gabrielle, and Byrnes, Andrew. “International People’s Tribunals in Asia: Political Theatre, Juridical Farce, or Meaningful Intervention.” (2014) 4 Asian Journal of International Law 106.

5. Jubb, Robert. “Political Realism.” Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics. 15 Aug. 2022.

6. Cheah, W.L. “The Potential and Limits of Peoples’ Tribunals as Legal Actors: Revisiting the Tokyo Women’s Tribunal.” Transnational Legal Theory 13, no. 1 (2022): 8–30.

UN Documents

1. U.N. Econ. & Soc. Council [ECOSOC], Comm. on Human Rights, Report on the Mission to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, the Republic of Korea and Japan on the Issue of Military Sexual Slavery in Wartime, 10, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/1996/53/Add.1 (Jan. 4, 1996) (prepared by Radhika Coomaraswamy).

2. United Nations Commission on Human Rights, “Contemporary Forms of Slavery: Systematic Rape, Sexual Slavery and Slavery-like Practices during Armed Conflict”, E/CN.4/Sub.2/1998/13 (22 June 1998).

Website

1. Asian Women’s Fund, Oral History of Former Comfort Women, [online] https://www.awf.or.jp/e4/lawsuit.html#:~:text=Starting%20on%201991%2C%20lawsuits%20by,the%20appeals%20were%20finally%20repelled [Accessed 1 April 2024].

2. Jubb, Robert. “Political Realism.” Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics. 15 Aug. 2022;. https://oxfordre.com/politics/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228637-e-2002 [Accessed 3 Apr. 2024]

3. European Court of Human Rights, ‘Basic Information’ (International Justice Resource Center) https://ijrcenter.org/european-court-of-human-rights/#:~:text=The%20European%20Court%20of%20Human,of%20the%20Council%20of%20Europe [Accessed 2nd April 2024]

4. African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights, ‘Basic Information’ (African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights) https://www.african-court.org/wpafc/basic-information/#:~:text=The%20African%20Court%20on%20Human,the%20African%20Court)%20in%20brief&text=The%20African%20Court%20is%20the,American%20Court%20of%20Human%20rights [Accessed 2nd April 2024]

---

Footnotes

[1]  The Oral History of Former Comfort Women, [online] (Asian Women's Fund, n.d.) <https://www.awf.or.jp/e3/oralhistory-00.html > [Accessed 1 April 2024]

[2] Erika Miyamoto, ‘The Decades-Long Struggle of ‘Comfort Women’ for Justice’ (2023) Vol. 6 No. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Gender Research 272 – 278, 273

[3]U.N. Econ. & Soc. Council [ECOSOC], Comm. on Human Rights, Report on the Mission to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, the Republic of Korea and Japan on the Issue of Military Sexual Slavery in Wartime, 10, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/1996/53/Add.1 (Jan. 4, 1996) (prepared by Radhika Coomaraswamy)

[4] ibid

[5] Yuki Tanaka, Hidden Horrors: Japanese War Crimes In World War II (1996) 94-95

[6]George Hicks, The Comfort Women: Japan’s Brutal Regime Of Enforced Prostitution In The Second World War (1994) 33-34

[7]Chin Sung Chung, 'Korean Women Drafted for Military Sexual Slavery by Japan', in True Stories of the Korean Comfort Women (Keith Howard ed., 1995) (1993)

[8] Maki Arakawa, 'A New Forum for Comfort Women: Fighting Japan in United States Federal Court', 16 Berkeley Women’s L.J. (2001) 174, 177-78

[9] Supra note 6

[10] Supra note 3 pg 27

[11]Taihei Okada, 'The “Comfort Women” Case: Judgment of April 27, 1998, Shimonoseki Branch, Yamaguchi Prefectural Court, Japan', 8 Pac. Rim L. & Pol’y J. (1999) 63, 73

[12] Supra note 8

[13] Supra note 6

[14] ibid

[15] Supra note 5

[16] United Nations Commission on Human Rights. Contemporary Forms of Slavery: Systematic Rape, Sexual Slavery and Slavery-like Practices during Armed Conflict. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1998/13 (22 June 1998)

[17] Supra note 7, 18

[18] David Boling, 'Mass Rape, Enforced Prostitution, and the Japanese Imperial Army: Japan Eschews International Legal Responsibility?', 32 Colum. J. Transnat’l L. (1995) 533, 542

[19] Piccigallo, P.R. (1979) 'The Japanese on Trial: Allied War Crimes Operations in the East, 1945-1951', University of Texas Press, Austin, TX

[20] This is explained further in the essay

[21] Asian Women's Fund, 'Lawsuits Brought Against Japan' (Asian Women's Fund) https://www.awf.or.jp/e4/lawsuit.html#:~:text=Starting%20on%201991%2C%20lawsuits%20by,the%20appeals%20were%20finally%20repelled accessed on 1 April

[22] ibid

[23] ibid

[24] Columbia Law School, 'Lawsuits Brought Against Japan by Former Korean Comfort Women' (Columbia Law School) https://kls.law.columbia.edu/content/lawsuits-brought-against-japan-former-korean-comfort-women#:~:text=July%202003%20the%20Tokyo%20High,to%20demand%20compensation%20had%20expired [Accessed 1 April 2024]

[25] Asia-Pacific War Korean Victims’ Compensation Claims Case, (Wa) No.17461, Judgment, 26 March 2001, Tokyo District Court

[26] Chungmoo Choi, Introduction, in The Comfort Women: Colonialism, War, and Sex vi (Chungmoo Choi ed., Duke University Press 1997)

[27] Federation of Korean Trade Unions, Comfort Women: Military Sexual Slavery by Japan 1, 5 (1997) (Obtained from the Federation of Korean Trade Unions in South Korea in July 1997)

[28] Peace Treaty with Japan, signed at San Francisco on 8 September 1951 [1952] 136 United Nations Treaty Series 45, Art 11

[29] Tree, Timothy. “INTERNATIONAL LAW: A SOLUTION OR A HINDRANCE TOWARDS RESOLVING THE ASIAN COMFORT WOMEN CONTROVERSY?” UCLA Journal of International Law and Foreign Affairs 5, no. 2 (2000): 461–98. < http://www.jstor.org/stable/45302149. > [Accessed on 16 January 2025]

[30] ibid

[31] McDougall, G. J. (2013) “Addressing State Responsibility for the Crime of Military Sexual Slavery during the Second World War: Further Attempts for Justice for the ‘Comfort Women’”, Korean Journal of International and Comparative Law, Vol 1, No. 2, pp 137-165

[32] John Stuart Mill, The Subjection of Women (John W. Parker and Son 1869)

[33] Christine M. Chinkin, 'Women’s International Tribunal on Japanese Military Sexual Slavery', (2001) 95 The American Journal of International Law 335, 337.

[34] ibid 212

[35] The Prosecutors and the Peoples of the Asia-Pacific Region v Hirohito Emperor Showa et al., The Women’s International War Crimes Tribunal for the Trial of Japan’s Military Sexual Slavery, Case No, PT-2000-1-T, 31 January 2002, 43.

[36] Amicus Curiae translated from Latin is "friend of the court”.

[37] Supra note 33, 338

[38] Judgment of The Women’s International War Crimes Tribunal 2000 for the Trial of Japanese Military Sexual Slavery delivered in The Hague, December 2001 at para 1053 - 1055

[39] Brooke Say, 'Ripe for Justice: A New UN Tool to Strengthen the Position of the “Comfort Women” and to Corner Japan into its Reparation Responsibility', 23 Penn St. Int’l L. Rev. (2005) 931, 963.

[40] Gabrielle Simm and Andrew Byrnes, ‘International People’s Tribunals in Asia: Political Theatre, Juridical Farce, or Meaningful Intervention’ (2014) 4 Asian Journal of International Law 106

[41] European Court of Human Rights, 'Basic Information' (International Justice Resource Center,) https://ijrcenter.org/european-court-of-human-rights/#:~:text=The%20European%20Court%20of%20Human,of%20the%20Council%20of%20Europe. accessed 2nd April 2024

African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights, 'Basic Information' (African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights,) https://www.african-court.org/wpafc/basic-information/#:~:text=The%20African%20Court%20on%20Human,the%20African%20Court)%20in%20brief&text=The%20African%20Court%20is%20the,American%20Court%20of%20Human%20rights. Accessed on 2 April 2024

[42] Supra note 39

[43] Supra note 37 at para 1092

[44] Cheah, W.L. “The Potential and Limits of Peoples’ Tribunals as Legal Actors: Revisiting the Tokyo Women’s Tribunal.” Transnational Legal Theory 13, no. 1 (2022): 8–30

[45] Commission of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations (CEACR), International Labour Organisation, Individual Observation Concerning Convention No. 29

[46] Ibid, 1

[47] Jubb, Robert. "Political Realism." Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics. 15 Aug. 2022; https://oxfordre.com/politics/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228637-e-2002. Accessed 3 Apr. 2024

[48] Supra note 29

[49] H.RES. 121, 110th Cong. (2007)

[50] ibid