A Social Mechanism that Binds a Definition: The Reappropriation of “Housework Harassment” in Japan.

by Mieko Takenobu

Recently an advertisement by Asahi Kasei Homes Corporation’s has come under fire in the media and on the internet. This advertisement dealt with the concept of “housework harassment”. The term, “housework harassment” was coined in my book, “Housework Labor Harassment – the core of making it hard to live,” published last year. In the book I defined housework labor harassment as harassment by social systems which insult, disrespect and exclude housework. The book also outlined the hardships suffered by women in poverty and hardships they endure for their on-going survival working in the home. The Asahi Kasei advertisement however, transformed the meaning of the term “housework harassment” into “hardships of men who do housework”. I would like to point out “the social mechanism” in which power holders bind a definition of terms and nullifies the terms defined by the others like women and minorities.

Turnaround of the definition
Housework is an important labor that supports lives of people. Daily activities such as child care, nursing care, and feeding children and the elderly, are important tasks that can be linked with housework. In Japan, such housework labor is done by “invisible” women and housewives whose work often goes unnoticed in society, and thus tend to receive weak political attention.
Under such a social system, women are having difficulties faced with long working hours and the lack of accessible child-care services. Nearly 60% of women quit their full time jobs after childbirth. Upon returning to the labor force, women generally work in part-time and/or irregular employment so that they can keep earning an income while raising children. Under this system, men are the main breadwinners and often women cannot be economically independent with their low salaries since they often work only for their pocket money in between their housework. Nearly 60% of women work in irregular employment, and have become a leading reason behind the increased incidence of poverty in Japan. Men, on the other hand, are expected to support women economically and have to endure long working hours, which sometimes even results in death by work (Karoshi). I published my book intending to raise awareness among people of the role and value of housework and inventing the term “housework harassment” to review issues surrounding working styles for both women and men.

Asahi Kasei Homes’ mis-adaptation of the term “housework harassment” devalues the original meaning and reinterpreted it meaning to be more about family squabbles over housework between wife and husband. In addition, the ad stated that wives’ attitude complaining about quality of housework done by their husbands is harassment. Such an ad may destroy the real meaning of housework harassment. Asahi Kasei Homes spread such distorted meaning of housework harassment among media through press releases. Furthermore, the ad was put out on several commuter trains in Tokyo. The distorted definition of “housework harassment” as harassment against men doing shoddy housework was reinforced through TV programs which took up and commented on the Asahi Kasei Homes’ ad.      

A wave of criticism from women
Soon after the ad was released, women took action against it. The very next day, a woman criticized a decrease in her husband’s motivation to do housework by hearing wives criticism in relation to this ad on FB, stating “How can you even think of deserving complements for your housework like a child?” She also mentioned about misinterpretation of the definition stating, “There would be a misunderstanding of the concept of housework harassment with the one in Mieko Takenobu’s ‘Housework Labor Harassment.’ One of my friends who read this comment called me showing her concern over the misinterpretation. Readers of the book also showed their concerns one after another. After careful consideration, mainly because of concerns that their usage of “housework harassment” caused women to hate the words and the intension of my book will be ruined before reaching out to those who need help, I decided to lodge a complaint directly with Asahi Kasei Homes asking them to stop misusing the term, housework harassment.

Asahi Kasei Homes quickly responded to my complaint. In response to the complaint, the company voluntarily removed the ad from the train and posted the definition of “housework harassment” from my book on their homepage. It also submitted an apology letter for its inappropriate usage of the words “housework harassment.”

A Social Mechanism that Binds the Definition Made by Women
I reacted responsively to this misuse of the definition of “housework harassment” because I have observed similar situations surrounding word changes in the past.

Seku-hara (sexual harassment): In 1980s, the wording “sexual harassment” appeared in Japan. It meant a serious infringement of human rights which results in excluding one gender from a workplace. However, it was abbreviated to the shorter wording “Seku-hara,” which turned the original meaning into somewhat less serious behavior as “mischiefs such as touching the bottoms of women” or “office romance” through the ways it was featured in male weekly magazines.

Work-Sharing: “Work Sharing” appeared in 1990s when the unemployment rate increased in the end of 1990s. It was originally meant to prevent unemployment by sharing work in Europe; however, the Japan Federation of Employers’ Association changed its definition into “preventing unemployment by lowering wages,” which in effect made it easier to lowering the wages of workers.       

Soushoku-Danshi (herbivore men): In 2006, “Soushoku-Danshi” (“herbivore men” which means opposite to macho men) was invented by columnist Maki Fukagawa. It showed a new male figure with whom women are able to socialize equally and frankly. However, the meaning has been transformed through magazines into “a men who cannot go out with women.”

What is common among these examples is the way that power holders changed the definition of new terms which do not suit them and are then new meanings are attached and distributed through media, watering down innovative elements that the original definition used to have. 

Distorting the original meaning of the particular terms and spreading it with its power nullifies the new images of the society that the original meaning wanted to realize and destroys the movement of restructuring the society.

I wanted to express a serious side effect of the turnaround of the original definition      in the complaint to Asahi Kasei Homes.

Women’s Pushback
It was a strong pushback from women (and men) who have been fed up with “the housework harassment society” and the power of the internet that eventually caused Asahi Kasei to pull their advertisements.

One of my friends who witnessed the misuse of the words on Facebook called me and told me her frustration, “Is this situation same as the one with ‘Seku-hara’?” It suddenly reminded me of the turnaround of the definitions of “Work Sharing” and “Soushoku Danshi (herbivore men)” I thought that all our frustration with these words whose definitions have been forcefully transformed would be meaningless if I remained silent.

I lodged my complaints with Asahi Kasei for three reasons I felt troublesome and five demands to improve these points. When I called the company for a meeting, the appointment was quickly set up as, according to Asahi Kasei, they were about to get in touch with me due to the reaction they got from female reporters who were following the discussion on Facebook.

Soon after I lodged the complaints with the company, I also made it public by posting it to Facebook. I thought it was necessary to disseminate it to the public many times in order to correct the misusage of “housework harassment” through mass advertisement.  
Many people shared my comments as well as posted it on their twitter and individual blogs. Many also mailed their complaints directly to Asahi Kasei Homes. Analytical articles on the ad of “housework harassment” were put on the web one after another by female cyber journalists. I believe these voices as a whole made the company reacted quickly to my complaint.

The Tokyo Metropolitan Council’s sexual comments generated a large swell of criticism spread through twitters. The wave of the criticism against Asahi Kasei’s distorted usage of “housework harassment” may have been small compared with the swell of the Council’s sexual comments, but it was a valuable experience for us since we succeeded in pushing back the powerful mass media through the use of the internet and social media as an effective tool.

I hope that this success can be used by others in their struggles against the social mechanism in which powerful forces misuse and transform terms and meanings for their own benefit and simultaneously devalue the original meanings of words and concepts of those less powerful than them.

Original Article (August 2, 2014): http://wan.or.jp/reading/?p=14247
Translated and Adapted by Fumie Saito


In the Muddy Waters of Historical Revisionism: Isolated from International Society (Part 3)

by Kazuko Itō, Lawyer and Human Right Activist
Excerpt from her Blog

(Part 1)
(Part 2)

Unusual Criticism by UN Human Rights Top Official

High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay, who is retiring the position in September 2014, made a public statement to criticize the Japanese government’s response to the issue of wartime sexual slavery on August 6th. It is unusual for a UN top official to criticize Japan so harshly. It made me feel the seriousness of the situation and the severity of international criticism.

She had never stopped sincere talks with Japan and had been negotiating with the government persistently. Obviously, she felt the attitude of the Japanese government for this time was inexcusable. Here is the whole statement.


I don't repeat her statement but what she points out is true. The Japanese government should respect her statement sincerely not because she is a UN human rights top official but because she is an expert on this issue.

Ms. Pillay was formerly a judge on the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda and sat in judgment on serious human rights infringements committed during the Rwandan Civil War. She earned a reputation for a groundbreaking judicial decision that sexual assaults on women that were prevalent in Rwanda as a means of "ethnic cleansing" could correspond to the crime of genocide (The Case of Akayesu).

This decision contributed to the development of an international law; the Rome Statute of International Criminal Court which, for the first time, stipulated that rape constitutes genocide or a crime against humanity. She is remembered as a lawyer who had the greatest influence on forming an international law that states wartime violence is an inexcusable crime. After that she served as a judge on the International Criminal Court.

Because of her rich experiences in an international law, she is respected everywhere and represents how far international law reached. It seems that she was not able to overlook Japan's attitude since she strongly believed that violence against women in conflict should be treated as an issue of human rights.

International common sense is based on an idea similar to the one held by Ms. Pillay. Therefore, Japan will never be able to go unpunished regardless of the sophistry they employ.

Suppose South Korea brings this issue to the International Court of Justice or it asks for advisory opinions from the court. While the judgment of such a civil claim is uncertain, those who have studied international laws even just a little are certain that Japan's responsibility should be clarified, judging from how far the international jurisprudence has reached.

Most Importantly, Lack of Decency is a Problem

If Japan continues to neglect the issue, whether Japan is a civilized state respecting basic human rights will become suspicious. It affects how other countries evaluate Japan even if they don’t show their true feeling obviously. Henceforth, Japan will be isolated from international society.

It is highly regretful.

If you value your country's honor, you should not hide or distort facts. In such a political climate, Japan will have only disrespectable people who have no true self-respect and lack overall sensitivity to human rights in the next generation.

Besides their international reputation, I wonder how they can neglect the issue as decent human beings. Aren’t they ashamed of themselves?

Each one of us needs to think whether it is all right to deny the responsibility by making the above excuses.

If this remains unresolved, it will affect future cases. Whenever an infringement of women’s human rights is committed, the truth of the case will never be investigated.

Not investigating the truth of a case and covering the facts is a long-lived tradition that has survived in issues such as sexually offensive heckling in the Tokyo Metropolitan Assembly. These issues have the same root. This is also the problem of current Japanese women.

My major concern is that as the result of hiding and distorting the facts and shelving offenders' responsibility, Japan might become such a disgraceful state that it goes to war again.

A state might make the same mistake by convincing its people to think a war is unavoidable, by paralyzing their imagination of agony from damage and sacrifice people in other nations faced during war or their decent sensitivity to human rights.

Each individual has to think by themselves whether this is right or not and has to take action accordingly.

If you don't know much about this issue or the Japan's responsibility as a perpetrator, read various books and study so that you can understand the facts.

Read the following documents, too.

Concluding observations on the sixth periodic report of Japan - announced by UN Human Rights Committee in July 2014

Why Does Japan Re-Examine the Kono Statement Secretly? (Japanese)

Hashimoto, Osaka Mayor, Says, "Comfort Women Were Necessary." Why Is It a Problem? (Japanese)

Original Article: http://wan.or.jp/book/?p=8093&page=3
Translated by Atsuko Ishikawa


In the Muddy Waters of Historical Revisionism: Isolated from International Society (Part 2)

by Kazuko Itō, Lawyer and Human Right Activist
Excerpt from her Blog

(Part 1)

Most women who were forced to be taken as sex slaves were minors. If Japanese politicians really believe that under-age girls, who were living their lives threatened by knives and guns during Japan’s military occupation, were all voluntarily and arbitrarily drafted, then they lack common sense and overall sensitivity to human rights.

Worse than that, they seek to downplay Japan’s action by declaring that other states too used to have a sex slavery system, which is equivalent to a molester refusing to take responsibility for his actions simply because he knows others that did it too.

With such an attitude, Japan will not be able to recover its honor.

They should study the basics of human rights.

It seems that the Japanese government condones the arguments of some Japanese politicians despite the harms this causes to victims. One of the roles of any government is to rebut such shameful beliefs maintained by some politicians and educate people in order to prevent it from happening again, but the Japanese government is neglecting its duties by not making any comment.

The Big Gap between International Common Sense and Excuses That Japan Makes Only Exposes Japan's Shame Further

International conflict over the issue of sex slavery is not merely a bilateral political problem between South Korea and Japan, but it’s also an issue of Japan's international responsibility as a perpetrator for its damaging actions against women from other Asian countries as well as the Netherlands.

More importantly, international society has been paying attention to how serious infringements on women’s human rights should be compensated and it is focusing on how Japan will deal with the issue as a state that has inflicted damage.

When a state is aware of a serious infringement of human rights, it should investigate what happened, reveal the facts, name people who are responsible, punish them, and compensate the victims. And as a state, it should identify measures so that it never happens again. This is an established and stable approach in order to guard against the infringement of human rights, and is unanimously supported by the international community.

A state involved in the infringement of human rights is bound to such obligations. This principle has been agreed upon in international society for a long time.

Particularly, the serious infringement of human rights like sexual abuse under international conflict is recognized as one of the most shameful human rights infringements. Overcoming it is recognized as one of the most important issues.

Leaving such conducts unpunished concerns the entire international community.

It is disappointing that the Japanese government remains absolutely irrelevant and ignorant about how far international society has reached in terms of human rights protection and it does not understand the seriousness of the matter.

Japan reduces the matter to a question of whether there was forceful capture or not, and it argues that without forceful capture there is no infringement of human rights and it therefore has no responsibility to pay damages if there isn't any evidence. Such an argument won’t work at all.

Japan's excuses and its denial of the facts is so disgraceful internationally that it only dishonors Japan terribly.

As for the history of the Nazi Holocaust, Germany admitted its responsibility for damage and expressed its apology, after much deliberation. However, at least they did not deny nor diminish their responsibility in this matter. Germany overcame the grave crimes, remembers it, and teaches its people thoroughly, and has continued sincere efforts to prevent the recurrence of this horrific event.

These policies give Germany moral authority and respect from the international community even though it was involved in these serious infringements of human rights.

Japan, as a state that experienced the damage from nuclear bombs, has also put into practice the renunciation of war for a long time, dealing with its responsibility as a war offender no matter how inconclusive it may have been.

However, while denying the facts these days, Japan is losing its moral authority.

Original Article: http://wan.or.jp/book/?p=8093&page=2
Translated by Atsuko Ishikawa


In the Muddy Waters of Historical Revisionism: Isolated from International Society (Part 1)

by Kazuko Itō, Lawyer and Human Right Activist
Excerpt from her Blog

August 15th was the anniversary of the end of the war ... Why did not Prime Minister mention Japan's responsibility for the damage during the war?

Yesterday was the anniversary of the end of the war. Prime Minister Shinzō Abe attended the Memorial Ceremony of the War Dead, which was held by the government.

In his address of the ceremony, neither did he mention Japan's responsibility for the damage inflicted on other Asian countries nor did he state the renunciation of war, as his predecessors had done. He did not mention them last year, either.

I suspect he intentionally did not mention these words two years in a row. Not only in other countries but also in Japan people worry about his attitude.

PM repeats to phrase "future-oriented relationships," but only victims have the right to say "let bygones be bygones. Let's develop future-oriented relationships." Offenders are not entitled to claim such relationships.

On the same day, South Korean President Park said "Now, South Korea and Japan should overview the new 50 years and build an amiable and cooperative relationship thinking about the future," showing that she is willing to improve the bilateral relationship.

Pointing out that in order to do so, some efforts should be made to heal our historical wounds, she asked Japan to solve the issue of Sex Slave. They both talk about future-oriented relationships but their visions are different.

Of all the days in a year, on the anniversary of the end of World War II, the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) held an urgent meeting.

More concerned is the move of the LDP.

On 15th, the LDP's association of MPs, "The Association that Talks about Japanese Future and History Education," held an urgent meeting and agreed that they were going to investigate the facts about the issue of Sex Slave.

This was followed by the report that the Asahi Shimbun, Japan's second-largest daily newspaper, retracted a series of articles on the women forced by Japan to serve in military brothels during World War II. As a chief of the LDP's policy research council, Takaichi insisted that, what we should do now is recover Japan’s honor and correct the wrong information spread over the world.

Her course of action is clear. She wants to recover Japan’s honor, saying, “Japan has not done such an evil thing.” Such an argument made by Japanese conservatives does not have a global currency. Japan is being left behind by a trend of promoting human rights in international society.

Don't they realize that they don't have any vision so they are losing Japan's honor rather than recovering it?

In August, the Asahi Shimbun retracted a part of past article after verifying a man's testimony, which said that during World War II, in Korea, then a Japanese colony, Japan forcefully transported hundreds of young women.

But why can they deny the fact that Japan forcefully transported women or Japan’s responsibility for damaging other Asian countries based on the judgment that the only one man’s testimony was false?

Even on the website of the Asian Women’s Fund, whose establishment was supported by the Japanese government, you can find articles mentioning forceful transportation. http://www.awf.or.jp/e-guidemap.htm

The conservatives are obsessed with whether material evidence to prove that Japan forced women to transport exists, trivializing the issue as if they are saying, “if you cannot find any material evidence, Japan has no responsibility for damaging the women.” Such an attitude deviates from the decent sense of human rights. As they make excuses, they are revealing that the Japanese lawmakers do not have a basic understanding of human rights. As a result, they disgrace themselves before the world.

Some young women were deceived if not forcefully taken but can Japan really make excuse, saying, “Japan did not forcefully take you to anywhere so although you were confined in a small space, savagely treated, and raped day and night, Japan was not guilty”?

Does any country or individual which make such an arrogant excuse deserve respect from others?

Their argument is almost equivalent to that of a criminal who says, “I'm not guilty because what I committed was not a robbery but a mere fraud” or “I'm not guilty because it was not a rape but it was only a sexual assault against a person who cannot offer resistance.”

As Japan is a constitutional state, it is not allowed to make such an excuse, is it?

Can’t they imagine how offensive their behaviors are?
I hesitate to say this but their personality is problematic.

Original Article: http://wan.or.jp/book/?p=8093
Translated by Atsuko Ishikawa


“The Coming of the New Class Society: Gender Matters” Chizuko Ueno’s Presentation at ISA World Congress of Sociology (July 2014)

ISA World Congress of Sociology (Facing an Unequal World: Challenging for Global Society) was held in Japan from July 13th to 18th, 2014. The Congress is held once every four years and over 4,000 sociologists gathered in Yokohama, Japan this time.
Program Information

Chizuko Ueno, chairperson of WAN, made a presentation at the Opening Presidential Panel, under the title of “the Coming of the New Class Society: Gender Matters.”

Presidential Plenary I: Facing an unequal World
Her presentation is available online at http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/50029763 (starting from 00:59:00)

Original Article: Chizuko’s Blog No. 75
Adopted and Translated by Fumie Saito


Say No to Makoto Aida Winning the Ango Award: Report on the Symposium

Say No to Niigata City Giving the Ango Award to Mr. Makoto Aida
Geijutsu to Ieba Nandemo Yurusarerunoka Renrakukai (Liaison Committee of “Can anything be allowed under the name of art?”) reports here on the symposium Houtteokenai Dai 8-kai Ango-sho – Jinken no Shiten Kara (Unignorable the 8th Ango Awards – From the Human Rights Perspective) (on June 22, at Niigata City) as well as on the post-symposium situations.

[Report on the Symposium]
Mr. Makoto Aida is an artist known for his works containing violence against women such as “Dogs” series. This symposium was planned by the residents and non-residents of Niigata city who question the fact that Niigata City had given him the 8th Ango Award. The four panelists were Chieko Nishiyama (Lecturer of Aoyama Gakuin University), Tomomi Shibuya (Associate Professor of Tokyo Keizai University), Minori Kitahara (Representative of Love Peace Club), and Kazue Muta (Professor of Osaka University). The members of Niigata Gender Seminar took a role of MC. Just over 40 people attended the symposium including some from outside of Niigata city or prefecture such as Tokyo.
Unfortunately, none of the four panelists are Niigata City residents. Shibuya mentioned this in her opening statement telling how difficult it is for locals to criticize the Niigata City’s award-giving in an onymous manner and explaining about the barrier they face in expanding the Ango Award criticism locally.
Each panelist’s presentation was summarized below.
Titling Kensho: Dai 8-kai Ango-sho no Tsukurarekata/ Katararekata (Verification: How the 8th Ango Awards were Created and Told), Nishiyama presented the photos of street ads for Makoto Aida exhibitions, his works such as “Dogs” series, the outline of the Ango Awards, the information on the City’s website, etc. Then, she re-criticized the criticism against feminism found in the Niigata Nippo’s article reporting a symposium held by Niigata University of International and Information Studies. The local newspaper’s article had been posted just before the artist received the Award. She strongly insisted that Niigata City needed to withdraw the Ango Award from Mr. Aida as the City failed to inform their citizens of his works containing sexual violence and his language and behavior about his restroom peeping and yet praised his “way of being” as “dysphemism.”
Shibuya chose “Why is it a problem for a city to award an artist with tarnished image which makes people think that he may have committed sex crimes?” as her subject. Following this, she introduced Mr. Aida’s Twitter comment as he implied his restroom peeping in the past, “My image as an artist has been tarnished anyway. (Even if my past crime was revealed,) it would not hurt me at all.” She pointed out that the problem was not his behavior in the past but his current attitude to unapologetically take whatever he may have done into his own image as an artist. She also pleaded that one of the roles of government is to promote the state in which anyone is recognized to have equal freedom and dignity, and the award by Niigata City would simply abandon the role. She strongly appealed not to become accustomed to acceptance and it was the time to raise a voice of anger.
Kitahara criticized, in association with the works of Makoto Aida, the current situation of Japan with a serious amount of Lolita-complex products distributed. Lolita-complex goods are top-ranked in the sales of Amazon’s adult products. In child star video, girls of around 5 years old or older appear in a bathing suit and are consumed sexually. Bathing suit events of elementary and junior high school girls are held every week in Akihabara. As the Japanese society is tolerant to such male sexual desire, criticism against pornography raised from the women’s side, similar to the criticism against Makoto Aida, tends to be neutralized. She concluded that she wanted to establish a network in which women could raise their voice and discuss pornography.
The last presentation was brought by Muta titled “Expression of Sexual Violence and Sexual Crimes that Silence Women.” By explaining the social structure in which women are forced to be silent in a misogynistic society in case of pornography or sexual crimes, she indicated asymmetricity that “freedom from sexual taboos” has always been established on a unilateral basis by using the sex of women. She proposed four things we could do or we wanted to do: 1) Believe in what you think “normal”; 2) Look at artworks closely and see the substance of them; 3) Look at artworks from a female point of view; and 4) Show how you feel.
Because the symposium covered an ongoing issue in the local community, close to 20 quality feedbacks and questions (equal to roughly half of the attendees) were given and highly concentrated Q&A continued. Finally the symposium came to a close and the place of discussion was changed and brought into a post-symposium party.

[Post-symposium Report: The Niigata Nippo news, the comments of Niigata City Bunka Seisaku-ka (Cultural Policy Department) and Niigata City Mayor]
The Niigata Nippo (morning edition on June 26) reported on this symposium titled “Niigata City’s selection for the Ango Awards received criticism at the symposium concerning affirmation of sexual violence.” As the Committee members, Nishiyama and Shibuya, as described above, questioned Mr. Aida’s taking restroom peeping into his own image as an artist and accused the City government’s awarding his way of being. However, the Niigata Nippo’s article deleted this point of argument and did not even mention the fact that Shibuya was one of the panelists. It reported the citizens on this symposium focusing only on the artworks. This is an apparent information control. In the end of this article, it introduced the worn-out comment issued by the City’s Cultural Policy Department; “the selection committee highly evaluated (Mr. Aida’s) critical spirit as he accurately looks at today.”
Furthermore, Niigata City Mayor said at a press conference held on June 27 on the Ango Award criticism at the June 22 symposium, “With being an outlaw as one of the subjects, various conflicts cannot be avoided from happening. (The critical voices) will not affect the future selection for the Awards.” “I sincerely listen to criticism. I will not argue with the selection committee whomever they choose.”The Niigata Nippo morning edition on June 28
For the last time, I would repeat this as many times as I could, but our point regarding Mr. Aida’s restroom peeping (in fact, female genitals peeping) is not “Don’t award someone who peeped into restrooms in the past.” We are saying, “the city must not praise as an outlaw or award the artist who implies his own sexual criminal experience of women’s restroom peeping, takes it into part of his “artist image” claiming it would not hurt him at all, and continues to utilize it as he publishes a restroom peeping novel.
Currently, sexual discrimination and sexual harassment by taunting at assemblies are being called into question with severity. Similarly, sexual discrimination and sexual harassment by giving an award should never be allowed. The dispute in Niigata will heat up from this point on.

Original Article on the WAN Website: August 13, 2014
Translated by Kumiko Moriya


Victory for plaintiffs: the Fukui District Court’s ruling on the suspension of operations at No. 3 and No. 4 reactors of the Oi nuclear power plant

Victory for plaintiffs: the Fukui District Court’s ruling on the suspension of operations at No. 3 and No. 4 reactors of the Oi nuclear power plant

Here is an on-the-spot report. 

[News Flash] 
Victory for plaintiffs: the Fukui District Court’s ruling on the suspension of operations at No. 3 and No. 4 reactors of the Oi nuclear power plant. 

The Fukui District Court delivered a sentence at 3 pm on May 21, 2014 on the suspension of operations at No. 3 and No. 4 reactors of the Oi nuclear power plant at 3 pm on May 21, 2014.  

President Judge Hideaki Higuchi ordered Kansai Electric Power Co. not to restart the two reactors, which is a ruling in favor of the plaintiffs.   

For more details about the lawsuit, please check:
http://adieunpp.com   (Japanese only), and
(English available. Outline of Judgement on Claim for Injunction on Operation of No. 3 and No. 4 Units at Ohi Nuclear Power Plant). 

For your reference, please read:
(Fukui court deals setback to Kansai Electric bid to restart Oi reactors, The Asahi Shimbun, May 21, 2014).

Reported by Harumi Kondaiji


Summaly translated by Shin Yamaaki