Photo/Illutration Members of the Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan submit a bill to the Lower House in late April for a new surname system for married couples. (Takeshi Iwashita)

One part of Hikaru Utada’s latest song created a buzz on social media over the Golden Week of national holidays in early May because of lyrics that asked, “In what year of the Reiwa Era (2019-present) will it be OK in this nation for married couples to use separate surnames?”

While the lyrics can be interpreted in a number of ways, there is no doubt it shows the high interest in how surnames should be used by married couples.

The proposed system for choosing separate surnames upon marriage gave couples the freedom to choose either using one of their surnames by both or continuing to use separate surnames that each used until marriage.

The Justice Ministry’s Legislative Council issued its recommendations about the surname system in 1996, so all the major points of debate have been placed on the table in the ensuing 29 years.

Under current law, couples can choose between the surnames of the husband and wife, but in actual practice wives in 95 percent of the cases change their surname.

The U.N.’s Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women has issued recommendations to the Japanese government on four occasions calling for legal revisions because the current provision forcing couples to use the same surname is “discriminatory.”

In 2024, Keidanren (Japan Business Federation) called for legal revisions as soon as possible.

Above all, the sudden breach of the achievements and assessment built up through work before marriage is severe.

Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba has said in the Diet that there was no good reason for delaying reaching a conclusion to the issue.

The legislative branch will be seen as negligent if the situation of the Diet not doing anything should continue.

But the ruling Liberal Democratic Party has already decided not to summarize opinions among members in the current Diet session.

The opposition parties that appeared to be more in favor of a new surname system are also not on the same page.

In late April, the Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan submitted a bill in the Lower House that proposed having the couple choose a surname at marriage and using the same surname for all their children.

The proposal more closely followed the recommendations of the Legislative Council because of concerns raised about the 2022 proposal compiled by five opposition parties that said the surname of children could be decided at their birth. There were concerns that proposal would lead to the possibility of siblings having different surnames.

But support for the proposals has not spread.

The Democratic Party for the People included a plank in its platform for the Lower House election last October that called for introducing a new surname system. But party leaders have made comments that are more cautious about pushing forward.

While junior coalition partner Komeito’s stance is that any legislation should be submitted by the government, it has not been aggressive in encouraging discussions within the LDP.

Serious discussions should be held in the Diet on the proposals submitted by the opposition. And it would be preferable if parties allowed members to vote according to their conscience when the bill came up for a vote rather than forcing them to toe the party line.

That would more appropriately reflect the views held by society as a whole.

It is Diet members who are the representatives of the people and it has been pointed out that excessively forcing all party members to vote the same way interferes with active discussions in the Diet.

There have been past cases in which parties allowed members to vote however they chose, particularly on legislation that was closely tied to the views of values and ethics held by lawmakers, including the bill on organ transplantation.

Delaying Diet discussions just because the LDP cannot come up with an internal consensus is inexcusable.

Each individual lawmaker will be asked to choose between overlooking the entrenchment of inequality or showing greater respect for the individual.

--The Asahi Shimbun, May 17

Related News