From Tokyo to The Hague: war crime tribunals and (shifting?) memory politics in Japan

Abstract

While studies on Japanese memory politics have taken up, for example, Diet members’ visits to Yasukuni Shrine and depictions of Japan's wartime conduct in school textbooks, few scholars have examined the country's membership in the International Criminal Court (ICC). However, the ICC is an intriguing case for analysis, as the court that prosecutes individuals for war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide and the crime of aggression (i.e. crimes against peace) is commonly portrayed as the successor of the Nuremberg and Tokyo War Crime Tribunals. Despite discussions in Japan revealing a rather negative stance towards the Tokyo Tribunal and its rulings, often dubbed ‘victor's justice’, the government has overall appeared supportive of the creation of the ICC and Japan eventually became a member in 2007. Against this backdrop, this article explores whether Tokyo's ICC membership can be regarded an exception to Japan's generally rather defensive memory politics and if so why this is the case. Based on an analysis of Diet debates, an investigation of the legal changes made in the context of Japan's ICC accession as well as an examination of the government's attitude towards current wartime compensation charges against Japanese companies, the article demonstrates that ICC membership is not an outlier, but it rather confirms Japan's approach to memory politics seen in other areas.