Plaintiffs evaluate "no obligation to perform" decision in Japan-Korea agreement dismissal

Plaintiffs evaluate "no obligation to perform" decision in Japan-Korea agreement dismissal 7:11 on December 28

k10012231021_201912280709_201912280711.mp4

The constitutional court in South Korea dismissed the complaint yesterday in a trial in which a former comfort woman and others complained that the agreement between Japan and Korea over the comfort women issue was unconstitutional. On the other hand, he expressed the view that there was no performance obligation in the Japan-Korea agreement, and the organization supporting the plaintiff praised, "We clarified that the Japan-Korea agreement did not lead to solving the problem."

For the 2015 Japan-Korea agreement, which confirmed the `` final and irreversible solution '' of the comfort women issue, a former comfort women woman and others appealed as `` hindering the right to claim compensation from the Japanese government '' , The Korean Constitutional Court dismissed the complaint on the 27th.

Regarding the reason, the Constitutional Court stated that the Japan-Korea agreement was a political agreement different from general treaties without the exchange of documents or the consent of the Diet, saying, "We cannot see that the rights of the victims have been violated. It will not be the subject of a trial. "

Furthermore, he pointed out that there was no expression indicating that there was a legal obligation in the Japan-Korea agreement that a foundation to support ex-comfort women was established. Was shown.

This is inconsistent with the Japanese government's position on South Korea to steadily implement the agreement.

A Korean group supporting the plaintiffs issued a comment on the court's decision, stating that it "clarified that the Japan-Korea agreement did not solve the comfort women issue."

Meanwhile, the Korean news agency, Union News, said that diplomatic influence was not significant, given that the constitution was not violated.