Photo/Illutration The Aigi Country Club in Kani, Gifu Prefecture (Asahi Shimbun file photo)

Can a golf club reject a membership application on the basis of the applicant's ethnic origin?

A new court decision has been handed down on this frequently contested issue.

The Nagoya High Court on Oct. 27 accepted the assertions made by the plaintiff, a naturalized Japanese, whose application for golf club membership was rejected because of his South Korean ancestry.

The court also ordered the defendant, Aigi Country Club in Gifu Prefecture, to pay damages.

The ruling pointed out that the rejection of the application constituted an act of baseless discrimination in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees equality of all under the law. It also contravened the International Bill of Human Rights as well as the provisions of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.

As such, the verdict concluded, the golf club's refusal to accept the plaintiff as a member was illegal beyond socially acceptable limits.

The plaintiff was a third-generation South Korean residing and operating his business in Japan before he became a Japanese citizen in 2018. He was denied membership to Aigi Country Club on the grounds that the club accepted only a limited number of foreign nationals and naturalized Japanese.

But the plaintiff's Japanese-born acquaintance, who applied for club membership at the same time, encountered no problems. When the plaintiff complained about the discrepancy, he had to confess his origin to his acquaintance, which was awkward in itself.

And being denied membership, to boot, must have reminded him anew of his many painful memories of being discriminated against.

The court was perfectly right to point out that the rejection violated his rights as an individual.

But this was anything but a unique case.

Golf clubs are private institutions to which golf enthusiasts belong and are guaranteed freedom of association under Article 21 of the Constitution.

How should this be reconciled with the "equality under the law" provision of Article 14?

Opinion is divided. In fact, the court of first instance--the Yokkaichi Branch of the Tsu District Court--had ruled against the plaintiff in April.

The issue now is to determine the nature of the value system that Aigi Country Club has been trying to protect.

The club's board of directors have always agreed on limiting the number of foreign members on the ground that their behavior and customs differ from those of their Japanese counterparts, and having too many of them would change the atmosphere of the club, according to the board.

The same argument has been made in other lawsuits of a similar nature.

But will this argument remain tenable forever, when Japanese society is already bringing in more foreign workers to make up for local labor shortages?

Discrimination by gender is also serious. The golf club that was chosen as the Tokyo Olympics competition venue was discovered to have had no regular female members and had to change its rules to accept women as full members.

Golf is said to have developed as a social pastime of the British aristocracy. Players are required to respect formality and good manners.

But is any change still anathema even though golf today is a pastime of the masses? Aigi Country Club has about 1,500 members and it is a social entity, according to the Nagoya High Court ruling.

Even in an all-Japanese group, each individual is different. If maintaining the club's atmosphere is what is desired, then it is crucial to screen applicants more strictly to ensure they conduct themselves appropriately as club members.

Disqualifying applicants because of their foreign origins is not only outright discrimination, but it is also doubtful if this is effective for achieving the desired result.

And if golf clubs believe in asserting autonomy, what they need most is the courage to reform themselves voluntarily. We urge club members to read over their club bylaws and agreements.

--The Asahi Shimbun, Nov. 8