The Daily Populous Wednesday March 26th, 2025 evening edition
Authored by straitstimes.com and submitted by Ofajus

Japan’s civil law and family registration law provisions are based on marriage between a man and a woman. PHOTO: PEXELS

– The Osaka High Court on March 25 became the fifth high court in Japan to rule that the country’s lack of legal recognition for same-sex marriage is unconstitutional, but it upheld a lower court decision not to award damages.

The latest ruling, in line with those of the Sapporo, Tokyo, Fukuoka and Nagoya high courts, overturned the Osaka District Court’s judgment that the effective ban on same-sex marriage was constitutional.

The Osaka High Court said that civil law provisions that do not allow same-sex marriage violate the right to equality under the Constitution.

Presiding Judge Kumiko Honda said the current provisions “cannot be justified as unavoidable, as legal disadvantages for same-sex couples are significantly large”.

The court also ruled that the marriage ban violates the section of the Constitution that says laws concerning matters pertaining to marriage and family “shall be enacted from the standpoint of individual dignity and the essential equality of the sexes”.

Calling marriage an “important right tied to the existence of an individual’s identity”, the judge said the ban on marriage between same-sex couples “severely undermines” that right.

At a press conference, the defence team praised the ruling as one that would have an impact on legal revisions.

In the lawsuit filed with the district court in 2019, three same-sex couples sought damages of one million yen (S$8,900) per person from the state.

In the six similar lawsuits filed with five district courts across Japan, the Osaka District Court is the only one so far to rule that the lack of legal recognition is constitutional.

Japan’s civil law and family registration law provisions are based on marriage between a man and a woman, and the privileges that result from matrimony, including inheritance rights, tax benefits and joint custody of children, are granted only to heterosexual couples.

In 2022, the Osaka District Court found the provisions constitutional, noting that legal disadvantages facing same-sex couples have eased over time, due partly to the spread of the partnership programme by local governments recognising such partnerships. KYODO NEWS

Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.

HeHH1329 on March 26th, 2025 at 15:40 UTC »

Its not the rulling by the constitutional court, its just a ruling by the high court (which equal to court of appeals), so its not binding and does not necessarily force the Japanese Parliament to amend the existig law.

Kavirell on March 26th, 2025 at 12:29 UTC »

It should be noted that this does not legalize gay marriage in Japan. This is the 5th time a district high court has ruled this, the first being in 2021. It is nothing more then a suggestion to the government that the ban be changed legislatively as a district high court can not make an overturning judgment on the constitution. Only the Supreme Court of Japan can and they have yet to take any of these cases.

ratione_materiae on March 26th, 2025 at 11:01 UTC »

> The Osaka High Court on March 25 became the fifth high court in Japan to rule that the country’s lack of legal recognition of same-sex marriage is unconstitutional, but it upheld a lower court decision not to award damages.

Some context: Osaka the prefecture contains Osaka the metropolitan area, the second largest in Japan after Tokyo. The Osaka High Court is one of eight in Japan (like US circuit courts) and has jurisdiction over six prefectures in mid-western Japan.

The prohibition on gay marriage comes from Article 24 of the Constitution, which was progressive back when it written by the post-war US occupation. The current constitution has never been amended.

> Marriage shall be based only on the mutual consent of both sexes and it shall be maintained through mutual cooperation with the equal rights of husband and wife as a basis.