Textbook Authorization System in Japan

By Miki Y. Ishikida

The Textbook Authorization System

The Textbook Authorization System was put into force in 1948, according to the 1947 School Education Law that grants the Ministry of Education (MOE) authority to authorize textbooks.� Liberal and leftist textbook authors claim that the MOE screeners take advantage of the system and impose their conservative perspectives on the textbook descriptions written by liberal and leftist authors.�

Before the 1990 change of the Textbook Authorization System, private publishers had to submit manuscripts for screening every three years, and the Textbook Authorization Committee sorted the manuscripts into the three categories: pass, conditional pass and non-pass.� For the �conditional� textbooks, screeners and writers and editors discussed the conditions and eventually made some compromise in order to pass it.� Under the new 1990 Textbook Authorization System, the �conditional� textbooks have no guarantee of passing after the authors and publishers correct the controversial description questioned by the screeners� opinions if they do not satisfy the screeners after the correction within 40 days (Tokutake 1995).� The authors and publishers complain that it is more threatening than the previous screening system because they have to compromise enough to satisfy the screeners to pass it (Kimijima 1996).�

Due to the strict rules of screening, a few large publishers participate in the textbook publication, which leaves a few choices.� Several textbook publishers monopolize the market.� For example, the top three publishers monopolized about 80 to 90 percent of market shares for most of elementary and middle school textbooks (Kodomo 2000).� The local boards of education select a textbook for elementary and middle schools among the authorized textbooks every four years.� For high school textbooks, each high school chooses a textbook for its own usage.�

The Ienaga Textbook Authorization Suits

The 32-year long Textbook Authorization Suits brought by the leftist textbook author, Ienaga Saburo made a tremendous impact on the contents of war descriptions in the history textbooks, and raised the public awareness toward the Textbook Authorization System (Table 1).�

Ienaga Saburo, a professor of the former Tokyo University of Education sued the government for the unconstitutionality and illegality of the Textbook Authorization System.� He sought 1.9-million-yen compensation for his mental damage caused by the screeners� opinions against his conditionally accepted history textbooks, Shin Nihonshi (A New History of Japan) in 1965.� He also argued in his second suit of 1967 that the MOE unconstitutionally and illegally rejected the authorization of his History Textbook, A New History of Japan.� The MOE argued that the Textbook Authorization System is a necessary means to enforce minimum national standards for the textbooks.

The first and last complete victory for Ienaga came from the 1970 verdict of his second suit.� Judge Sugimoto of the Tokyo District Court declared that the Textbook Authorization System was unconstitutional and illegal if the inspection intervened the contents of thoughts beyond the correction of facts and technical errors, and supported the plaintiff�s request that the disapproval of the textbook concerned be overturned.� The shocked government appealed the Tokyo High Court immediately.� The 1975 verdict of Tokyo High Court declared the Authorization System constitutional, but supported the plaintiff�s demand.�

Concerning the war responsibility issues, Ienaga brought the third suit to the Tokyo District Court in 1984.� He asked the government to compensate him for two million yen for the mental disturbance caused by the conditional approval of eight sections in his high school textbook, New Japanese History in 1980, the disapproval of his �correction� of controversial phrases in 1982, and conditional approval in 1983.� These descriptions in question included descriptions of the Asia-Pacific War, such as Nanking massacre, Unit 731, and the War of Okinawa.� Responding to the war responsibility issues and the victimizer�s view of history in the 1990s, the Supreme Court declared that the screeners unfairly and illegally asked Ienaga to change the four sections: the �revolutionary residents corps (somotai)�; Nanking massacre; the rape of women; and Unit 731, in favor of Ienaga, while confirming the constitutionality of the Textbook Authorization System in 1997, and ended the 32-year long lawsuits by Ienaga.

Table 1����������� Ienaga Suits

(Source: Tokutake 1995:146; Ienaga 1995: 199-201; Asahi August 30 1997; Nozaki and Inokuchi 1998)

The Yokohama Textbook Authorization Suit

On June 11, 1993, Takashima Nobuyoshi, a high school teacher, following the precedent of the Ienaga Textbook Suits brought his case to the Yokohama District Court, asking the MOE for the compensation of 1,000,000 yen.� He was asked by textbook screeners to change four sections in his assigned four page description of the high school civics textbook: New Contemporary Society in 1992.� The disputed descriptions are: the extraordinary treatment by the mass media about the death of Emperor Showa; the US government�s censorship of the mass media about the Gulf War; Fukuzawa Yukichi�s idea about the colonization of Asia; and the opinions of Asian countries about the overseas deployment of the SDF (Self-Defense Forces) (Tokutake 1995).� The Yokohama Regional Court issued a verdict in 1998 that the opinions of screeners about the Fukuzawa case and the SDF case were inappropriate and ordered the government to compensate him for 200,000 yen, although the Court declared the constitutionality of the Textbook Authorization System (Tokutake 1999).� Plaintiff Takashima went on an appeal to the Tokyo High Court.�

   Home������ Japanese Education����� References������

Copyright 2001-2003 USJP.org.  All rights reserved.