In August 2014 the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) reviewed Japan. The committee noted concern that Japan has still not adopted a comprehensive definition for racial discrimination in its domestic legislation, nor legislation enabling victims to seek legal redress. One of the most troubling and urgent issues, however, was the continuing problem of hate speech. This included, in April, the use of Nazi imagery by right-wing nationalists during anti-Chinese and anti-Korean demonstrations in Tokyo, as well as various racist slurs. Persistent anti-foreigner sentiment is reflected in 'Japanese only' signs still posted by some hotels and restaurants. In March, a giant 'Japanese Only' banner was even hung from the Saitama Stadium in Tokyo by supporters of the Urawa Red Diamonds during a football game, prompting an order from the national J-League for the club to play a match in an empty stadium – an edict that cost the club in excess of US$1 million.

There were some positive developments to address the issue. In July the Osaka High Court, followed by the Supreme Court in December, upheld a groundbreaking October 2013 ruling by Kyoto High Court that had found Zaitokukai, an organization opposed to the granting of certain rights to foreign residents in Japan, guilty of racial discrimination for shouting abuse and slogans in front of a Korean school. At the beginning of 2014, an Osaka municipal human rights committee also drafted recommendations for curbing hate speech, including the creation of a municipal fund to offset court costs for victims. Multiple municipalities have followed suit with similar proposals, though there are concerns that hate speech legislation will be difficult to pass due to free speech concerns.

Legal and institutional discrimination against foreigners and minorities continues to affect many residents, some of whom have spent their entire lives in Japan. In July, for instance, the Supreme Court overturned a Fukuoka High Court decision, ruling instead that permanent residents do not have a guaranteed right to receive welfare benefits. The case involved an 82-year-old Chinese woman who had been born and grew up in Japan, but was denied welfare because she was not a Japanese national.

Japan's indigenous Ainu also continue to face discrimination, limited access to basic services and low levels of political participation. Even in Hokkaido, where the majority are based, most Ainu have lower economic status than non-Ainu Hokkaido residents. When Japan ratified the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples in 2007 it denied it had any indigenous peoples, but the next year it passed a non-binding resolution recognizing the Ainu as indigenous to Japan. The decision was a major victory in recognizing the distinctiveness of Ainu language and culture. However, in November 2014 Masaru Onodera, a member of the Hokkaido prefectural parliament, created controversy when he publicly stated Ainu indigenousness was 'highly questionable'.

The struggle for recognition is even more acute for indigenous Okinawans (or Ryūkyūans) who, unlike Ainu, have yet to receive official indigenous status, despite previous UN recommendations. Their culture and traditional lands are threatened by the denial of their right to free and informed participation in policy-making, especially concerning the expansion of US military bases in Okinawa – an issue that continues to be perceived as a form of discrimination against the indigenous population. Ongoing construction of a new US base in Henoko, situated in a bay rich in biodiversity including the critically endangered Okinawan dugong, was a particularly contentious issue in Okinawan politics in 2014. Local protests swelled to several thousands demonstrating in September and October, ahead of elections in November, with authorities responding harshly by detaining and arresting anyone who approached the construction site. The subsequent election of Takeshi Onaga in the November Okinawan gubernatorial elections was in large part due to his strict opposition to military base construction. In January 2015, Tokyo announced that, despite considerable local opposition, the plan to relocate a US military base from Futenma to Henoko would still continue. However, as of April 2015 Onaga was still actively opposing plans to relocate the base.

Japan has yet to implement CERD's 2010 recommendation to create a specific government agency to deal with Burakumin issues. Burakumin are not a distinct ethnic group in Japan, but the descendants of outcast communities from the feudal era who continue to face discrimination in mainstream Japanese society. Although they are not subject to official discrimination, Burakumin still face deep-seated prejudice, especially in marriage and employment, with some companies referring to lists of family names and neighbourhoods to discriminate against Burakumin. Historically, Burakumin neighbourhoods, also known as dowa, were isolated and excluded settlements with little in the way of public services or other amenities. Increasing numbers migrated to urban areas in the post-war period, resulting in the expansion of segregated slums.

Following strong advocacy efforts from Buraku organizations, however, the Japanese government committed substantial government funds between 1969 and 1997 to improving Buraku urban neighbourhoods, funding upgraded housing, infrastructure development and other improvements. As a result, in large part because of the active efforts of Buraku residents, living conditions in the areas have generally improved. By 2002, the government had completed urban development projects related to the Dowa Special Measures. Among other positive developments, the physical environment in traditionally Buraku districts has improved and other indicators, such as educational attainment and employment, have also risen. However, some of the community cohesion is being weakened as some more affluent Buraku move out and poorer non-Buraku groups move in from elsewhere, meaning that sub-standard housing and other issues are reappearing.

This is not a UNHCR publication. UNHCR is not responsible for, nor does it necessarily endorse, its content. Any views expressed are solely those of the author or publisher and do not necessarily reflect those of UNHCR, the United Nations or its Member States.