"I've been unable to prevent my daughter from being forced to bear the same problem I've suffered for 30 years," lamented a 56-year-old high school teacher in Nagano Prefecture.

The woman was taken aback four years ago when her eldest daughter, 29, complained about the hardships of changing her surname after marriage.

Despite radical societal changes over time, why is this issue still ignored? What is the government's response to this question, which is in many women’s minds?

On March 8, which is designated as International Women's Day, a group of 12 men and women, including the high school teacher, will file lawsuits in both Tokyo and Sapporo District Courts over the constitutionality of the traditional legal system that requires married couples to adopt the same surname.

They argue that provisions in the Civil Code and the Family Registration Law that establish this rule violate the Constitution, which says all people should be “respected as individuals.”

This marks the third collective lawsuit on the matter.

Legally, either the husband's or wife's surname can be chosen, but in reality, 95 percent of married women change their surnames. This reality causes many women to suffer inconveniences, disadvantages and a loss of identity while perpetuating the sexist notion that "women are the ones to change their surnames” when they are married.

Women have been campaigning against this system for half a century to liberate themselves from the negative consequences of the outdated rule.

In 1996, the Justice Ministry’s Legislative Council recommended introducing a selective separate surnames system for married couples, but opposition from the ruling Liberal Democratic Party, which contended that the proposed system would cause “a loss of family unity," blocked the bill from submission.

It's been 28 years since then and the ball is in the Diet's court. The Supreme Court has twice ruled on the issue. While declaring the current system to be constitutional, the top court’s Grand Bench pointed out that it's a matter that "should be debated and decided by the Diet."

A supplementary opinion in a 2021 decision even stated that the system "could be deemed unconstitutional in the future," urging the Diet to keep an eye on significant changes in society and people’s views and perceptions and to respond to them.

Still, the Diet has not started a debate on the matter.

Instead, the government and the LDP, as if to say "this is enough," have promoted the policy of allowing married people who have changed their surnames to continue using their birth names for social and business activities without changing the principle that married couples should use the same family name.

The ruling camp, enlisting the support of the business community and ministries, has expanded areas where this option is allowed.

However, the limitations of this approach are becoming increasingly apparent.

In January this year, Keidanren (Japan Business Federation) called on the government to introduce a selective separate surnames system. The business lobby cited various examples of disadvantages caused by the current system.

There have been cases where business names couldn't be used to sign contracts. In other cases, researchers’ past research and achievements weren't recognized as those by the same persons, who had changed their names after marriage.

These examples provided by companies highlight the arrogance of the policy, designed to cover up the system’s negative impacts on important personal and financial activities by promoting the use of "temporary surnames.”

A selective separate surnames system is an approach to provide another option for those who want them, not to force separate surnames on those who do not.

The LDP is now the only major political party still opposing the system although there are proponents within the party.

Prime Minister Fumio Kishida was one of them, having served as a promoter for a league of Diet members aiming for the early realization of the separate surnames system, but he later shifted to a cautious stance toward the proposal.

Kishida likes to talk about creating a "society where diversity is respected." Then, what is there to fear? It is long overdue for the Diet to have an open debate on this issue and to provide an answer.

--The Asahi Shimbun, March 8