The Supreme Court on Friday failed to clear up the controversy over whether Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi's visits to war-related Yasukuni Shrine violated the constitutional separation of state and religion.
The top court rejected a lawsuit concerning his first visit filed by 278 plaintiffs in Osaka Prefecture and other areas, but it did not rule on the constitutionality of that trip.
The Shinto shrine in Tokyo honors the nation's war dead, but Class-A war criminals from World War II are also enshrined there.
The 278 plaintiffs, who included family members of those enshrined at Yasukuni, said Koizumi's Aug. 13, 2001, visit caused them psychological stress because it violated the principle of separation of politics and religion. They also said the trip violated their rights and benefits regarding how they honor the war dead.
The plaintiffs had sought 10,000 yen each in compensation from Koizumi, the government and Yasukuni Shrine.
The Supreme Court dismissed their compensation claims.
"It cannot be said that the visit had violated their legal benefits in a way that could be subject to compensation," Presiding Justice Isao Imai of the Second Petty Bench said.
"Although their own sentiments and religious emotions are offended when someone makes a visit to a particular shrine, causing them repugnant feelings, it cannot be said that they can immediately seek compensation," he said.
But the top court, given its first opportunity to rule on the constitutionality of Koizumi's visit, did not mention the issue. The Supreme Court will likely take the same approach in two other pending cases.
A number of lawsuits have been filed over Koizumi's pilgrimages to the shrine, which have infuriated Beijing, Seoul and many in Japan, given the shrine's connections to World War II.
There have been eight rulings at district courts and four at high courts. All compensation demands have been rejected, but some of the rulings on the constitutionality of the visits have been in complete contrast.
Some courts have refrained from ruling on this aspect of the lawsuits. The Supreme Court took the same approach, focusing mainly on whether the plaintiffs were entitled to compensation.
Justice Shigeo Takii, in his supplementary opinion, said plaintiffs could call for legal action when:
・Public authorities interfere in the plaintiffs' activities to honor the memory of deceased people who had special connections with them, and;
・Public authorities commemorate the deceased in a different religious way that would go against the will of the bereaved families.
Takii said the situation involving Koizumi's Aug. 13 visit in 2001 was different.
Koizumi has made five visits to the shrine since taking office in April 2001.