hankyoreh

Lee Yong-soo, a survivor of sexual slavery by the Japanese military, appears at a press conference at the Korea Press Center on Feb. 16 calling for a referral of the “comfort women” issue to the UN’s International Court of Justice. (Yonhap News)

At 11 am on Feb. 16, over 100 reporters from South Korea and Japan packed the 20th floor of Seoul’s Korea Press Center for a press conference calling for referral of the Japanese military “comfort women” issue to the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

Lee Yong-soo, a 92-year-old survivor of sexual slavery by the Japanese military, appeared in pink hanbok, a traditional Korean outfit. After greeting the reporters, she began reading out a written appeal. At times, her voice trembled with emotion; by the end, she was crying.

“I’ve done everything I could up to this point. I’ve traveled around the world sharing my story, I’ve gone to the US to get a resolution passed [by the House of Representatives in June 2007], and I’ve worked to have a monument put up in San Francisco. I’ve even taken part in a trial. Yet Japan continues to defy the law. It ignores South Korean court rulings, and it doesn’t even appeal them — it just keeps doubling down. They even have the gall to claim that it’s our courts that violated international law.”

Yet the message she sought to deliver was clear.

“There is no time left,” Lee said. “My last wish is for President Moon Jae-in and the South Korean government to receive an international law judgment so that I can finally go and join the other [military sexual slavery victims who have passed away].”

On Jan. 8, a historic South Korean court ruling ordered the Japanese government to provide compensation to victims of military sexual slavery, concluding that the principle of “sovereign immunity” according to customary international law may not apply in cases of “inhumane illegal acts” such as the comfort women issue.

As a survivor herself, Lee officially threw her support behind the calls for an ICJ referral that have been coming from some quarters in South Korea and Japan since that ruling.

Attendees at the press conference that day stressed the significance of an ICJ referral and said South Korea could look forward to a favorable judgment.

“The victims have cried out over and over for an official apology and lawful compensation. [An ICJ referral] seems to be a rational means of achieving this,” said Kim Hyeon-jeong, spokesperson for the Committee to Pursue an International Court of Justice Referral of the Japanese Military Comfort Women Issue.

Ethan Hee-seok Shin, a scholar of international law who is taking part in the committee’s efforts, said, “South Korea’s chances are quite good.”

“Such a ruling could offer a way of making progress toward resolving the longstanding historical issues between South Korea and Japan, and it could be an opportunity to repair relations between the two sides, which have broken down so badly over the past 10 years that there appears to be no exit strategy,” he suggested.

Shin also predicted that the ICJ could recognize the Japanese military’s system of sexual slavery as a “war crime that practically violated international law,” while concluding that “individual rights to claim damages were procedurally forfeited by the 1965 South Korea-Japan Claims Settlement Agreement” and that “South Korean courts must respect Japan’s sovereign immunity.”

Even though this would eliminate the right to the individual damages that victims have been claiming, he suggested that it might represent a “satisfactory outcome” in the sense that it would be a way of addressing one of their key demands, namely the acknowledgment that the comfort women system was a “state crime” perpetrated by Japan.

But the prospects of victory do not appear as clear-cut as Lee and the committee suggested. An ICJ referral would require the consent of both South Korea and Japan, but the two sides are operating under a complex set of considerations.

For now, Seoul remains circumspect. The concern is that if it moves too quickly to bring up the possibility of an ICJ case, the situation could slip out of its grasp as Japan deploys its astute diplomatic maneuvering.

In a regular briefing on Feb. 16, Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) spokesperson Choi Young-sam said, “We intend to listen a bit more to what the comfort women survivors have to say, while giving careful consideration to the matter of an International Court of Justice case.”

The attitude in Japan was similar. Japanese Foreign Minister Toshimitsu Motegi, in his regular press conference, said that he would “reserve comment” because he had “no way of knowing the intentions or ideas behind the remarks.”

But with Japan maintaining that the comfort women issue was “finally and irreversibly” resolved by a December 2015 intergovernmental agreement with South Korea, it is very unlikely to agree to the committee’s idea of referring that single issue to the ICJ.

Along similar lines, Lee Na-young, president of the Korean Council for Justice and Remembrance for the Issues of Military Sexual Slavery by Japan, said, “While we do have some chance of winning if we proceed [to the ICJ] with the single issue of the comfort women, there is the possibility that Japan will take issue with some of the Republic of Korea’s founding principles, including matters like Dokdo and the legality of colonial rule.”

“We could end up with another set of conflicts that are a far cry from any sort of resolution of the issue,” she warned.

By Gil Yun-hyung & Kim Ji-eun, staff reporters

Please direct questions or comments to [english@hani.co.kr]