Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of the Right to Freedom of Thought
- The Cambridge Handbook of the Right to Freedom of Thought
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Contributors
- Foreword
- Acknowledgements
- Part I Introduction
- Part II Asia
- 3 The Right to Freedom of Thought in Japan
- 4 The Right to Freedom of Thought in China
- 5 The Right to Freedom of Thought in Vietnam
- 6 The Right to Freedom of Thought in Malaysia
- 7 The Right to Freedom of Thought in India
- Part III Europe
- Part IV Africa
- Part V Americas
- Part VI The Right to Freedom of Thought in Context
- Index
3 - The Right to Freedom of Thought in Japan
from Part II - Asia
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 06 March 2025
- The Cambridge Handbook of the Right to Freedom of Thought
- The Cambridge Handbook of the Right to Freedom of Thought
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Contributors
- Foreword
- Acknowledgements
- Part I Introduction
- Part II Asia
- 3 The Right to Freedom of Thought in Japan
- 4 The Right to Freedom of Thought in China
- 5 The Right to Freedom of Thought in Vietnam
- 6 The Right to Freedom of Thought in Malaysia
- 7 The Right to Freedom of Thought in India
- Part III Europe
- Part IV Africa
- Part V Americas
- Part VI The Right to Freedom of Thought in Context
- Index
Summary
Article 19 of the Constitution of Japan, which states, “Freedom of thought and conscience shall not be violated,” guarantees freedom of thought, a historically significant right due to its absence in the previous 1889 Imperial Constitution and subsequent suppression of ideologies like communism and anti-imperialism. Post-Second World War reforms led to its explicit inclusion in the 1946 Constitution. Although there are not many lawsuits regarding whether government acts or statutes violate this right is into question, the Japanese Supreme Court (SCJ) has said something about the right. The SCJ has ruled that it primarily protects a person’s world vision or life view but does not cover all mental activities. The SCJ has identified both direct (e.g., compulsion to hold or confess specific thoughts) and indirect restrictions (e.g., a compulsion to school teachers to stand up and sing the national anthem at school ceremonies such as entrance and graduation), with some restrictions deemed constitutional if justified. In this sense, Freedom of thought is not absolute in Japan. The SCJ also addresses the balance of interests in private relations, acknowledging the indirect effect of constitutional rights.
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2025