Photo/Illutration A common-law couple using the pseudonyms Mitsuru Nezu and Toko Kurokawa in Tokyo on May 30. They joined a 2024 lawsuit aiming to give married couples the option of maintaining different surnames. (Suzuka Tominaga)

A Lower House debate on a selective surname bill signifies the first time in 28 years for the issue to make it to the Diet.

However, there are no prospects for the bill to be passed before the current Diet session closes in a week, meaning the difficulties will continue for a Tokyo couple who have maintained a de facto marriage.

It has been 17 years since Mitsuru Nezu and Toko Kurokawa—both pseudonyms out of consideration for their daughter—opted for a common-law marriage in order for them to hold different surnames.

Kurokawa, 52, said her last name “is the foundation that shapes my life and myself.”

When the couple were initially considering marriage, Kurokawa had already been known by her last name and used it in her professional life for more than 30 years.

She said she did not want to be legally married and force either her or her husband to give up their last name.

Nezu, 51, had conversely thought that women change their last names by default.

However, he changed his mind after building an equal relationship with Kurokawa.

“There is no reason for a woman to change her last name other than customary practice,” he concluded. “We can’t just follow the same old way of doing things.”

The couple instead chose common-law marriage, thinking, “This is our way of life.”

But as the years went by, the disadvantages and insecurities of being in a non-legal partnership “began to hit us like body blows.”

About 10 years ago when the couple wanted to buy a house, they inquired with every major financial institution about obtaining a pair loan, or joint mortgage. Almost all of them did not recognize common-law marriages.

“I thought that de facto marriages were treated lightly,” Kurokawa said.

The two ended up signing for a loan with a high interest rate.

Health and tax matters hold additional stressors as their medical expenses cannot be combined into one household and are not eligible for a tax deduction.

Were one of them to become a dependent after falling ill or becoming disabled, the couple would be unable to file for a spouse deduction. A death would likewise not include the standard deductions or benefits, including those concerning inheritance.

Both also are unclear on their ability to consent to a surgery on behalf of the other in the event of an emergency.

Though they all live together, Kurokawa has sole custody of their daughter who is in junior high school.

“We eat together as a family, laugh together and fight. These casual, sweet days can’t be separated from anxiety, as if we are walking on thin ice,” Kurokawa said.

The couple joined a group of plaintiffs in a March 2024 damage lawsuit calling for a system allowing married couples to have different surnames.

The plaintiffs claim that provisions of the Civil Code and the Family Registration Law that bar couples from choosing separate last names violate their constitutional rights.

Specifically, they cite Article 24 of the Constitution that prohibits unreasonable restrictions on marriage and Article 13, which guarantees the right to the pursuit of happiness.

In two similar court cases in 2015 and 2021, the Grand Bench of the Supreme Court ruled that the current system is constitutional.

Nezu said he wants to ask the top court justices, “Have you ever imagined yourself in the position of suffering?”

A proposal from opposition parties to legislate the expansion of the use of maiden names to hold the same legal weight as a shared surname was also discussed at the current Diet session.

However, Nezu and Kurokawa believe that “changing one’s family name does not alter the fact that one is abandoning the family name that has been a part of one’s life for many years, and the problem of loss of identity will not be solved.”

When both were preparing for the lawsuit, they made one attempt to register their marriage in February 2024.

However, it was rejected after pair did not choose “husband’s name” or “wife’s name” in the surname section, but instead checked both options.

The couple said they hope they will be able to joyfully register their marriage when a system open to different surnames is established.

Related News