(10 POINTS)
In 1993, historians confirmed that during World War II, “comfort women” were forced into serving the Japanese military. These women were either abducted or lured by false promises of jobs as cooks or waitresses, and eventually forced against their will to have sex with Japanese soldiers on a daily basis during the course of the war, and often suffered from severe beatings and venereal diseases. The Japanese government contends that the “comfort stations” were run as “onsite military brothels” (or prostitution houses) by private operators, and not by the Japanese military. There were many Filipina “comfort women.”
(a) Name at least one basic principle or norm of international humanitarian law that was violated by the Japanese military in the treatment of the “comfort women.”
(b) The surviving Filipina “comfort women” demand that the Japanese government apologize and pay them compensation. However, under the 1951 San Francisco Peace Agreement – the legal instrument that ended the state of war between Japan and the Allied Forces – all the injured states, including the Philippines, received war reparations and, in return, waived all claims against Japan arising from the war. Is that a valid defense?
(c) The surviving Filipina “comfort women” sue the Japanese government for damages before Philippine courts. Will that case prosper?
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
LEGALPASSION.COM
INSTRUCTIONS:
Use this website to share your legal mind. Please feel free to post your Suggested Answers to these Bar Questions. You can also view and response to the opinions of others.
Topics / Keywords
- academic freedom (1)
- amendment (1)
- anti-hacker law (1)
- BP 880 - Public Assembly Law of 1985 (1)
- comfort women (1)
- constitutional rights (1)
- contraceptive (1)
- educational institution (1)
- exevutive order (1)
- extradition (1)
- GOCC (1)
- human rights (1)
- Internal Revenue Allocation (1)
- oath (1)
- official languages (1)
- party list (1)
- sex slave (1)
1 comment:
IV.
a.
One norm of international humanitarian law that was violated by the Japanese military in the treatment of the “comfort women” is the norm against militaries forcing civilians to perform prohibited labor.
b.
Yes. The “comfort women” cannot assert individual claims against Japan because the sovereign authority of our State already agreed for the settlement of such claims under the 1951 San Francisco Peace Agreement.
The power of the State to make such compromises is recognized by international law.
c.
No, because, as stated above, the State already entered into a valid agreement for the settlement of such claims for damages of the “comfort women”. Moreover, a sovereign cannot, without its consent, be made a respondent in the courts of another sovereign.
Post a Comment