世界の同性婚の情勢2015.02.15
憲法上の同性結婚の扱いについて（EMA日本の見解）
東京都渋谷区の同性パートナーシップ証明発行に関する報道において、同性結婚が日本国憲法（以下、憲法）の下では認められていないという報道が散見されます。しかし日本における同性結婚の実現に向けた活動に取り組むEMA日本（いーまにっぽん）は、憲法の下で同性結婚は法的に認められた権利であると考えています。従って、同性結婚が憲法上認められていないという意見には、以下の理由から反対をします。 （※英語訳も下にあります。English follows Japanese）
- 憲法第24条1項が婚姻を規定しています。その中で、「婚姻は、両性の合意のみに基づいて成立し、夫婦が同等の権利を有する」旨が規定されています。これは戦前、(1)女性が自分の意に沿わない形で家のために結婚をさせられたり、(2)家父長制度の下、夫である男性が妻である女性を支配するなど、憲法制定当時の婚姻を含む家族関係が女性を蔑ろにしてきたという時代背景を踏まえ、「家族関係形成の自由」と「男女平等の理念」を新しい戦後日本の家族モデルに取り入れることを目的として規定したものです。当然、憲法制定当時、同性間で結婚をするという概念は憲法起草関係者の間では認識されておらず、女性の地位向上に主眼が置かれたこの婚姻の憲法規定は同性婚を禁止する意図はありませんでした。
- 人々のライフスタイルや社会の状況も時間の経過とともに変わりゆくものです。憲法もまた「生ける法」として、新しい価値観や社会状況に対応してこそ、その存在意義を十分に発揮するものと考えます。
- 同性を愛する者も、異性を愛する者と同様に（憲法第14条1項：「法の下の平等」）、個人として好きな人と公的に認められた家族関係を形成する自由が認められ（憲法第13条第1文：「個人として尊重」）、幸せになる権利（第13条第2文「幸福追求」）を誰も奪うことは出来ないはずです。このように憲法理念に立脚した誰も奪うことの出来ない同性結婚の権利は、憲法上保護されるべき基本的人権の一つであり、当然に憲法第24条1項の婚姻の規定にその根拠を求めることができる権利であると私達は考えます。
- すでに欧米を中心に先進諸国では同性結婚やそれに準ずる制度が認められています。経済的には同じく先進国の一員である日本は同性結婚の法制化という面では大幅に立ち遅れています。憲法の前文には「われらは・・・偏狭を地上から永遠に除去しようと努めている国際社会において、名誉ある地位を占めたいと思う」との誇るべき崇高な理念が掲げられていますが、日本は同性婚未承認国として残念ながら先進諸国の中で不名誉な地位を占めています。不合理な憲法解釈に頑なにこだわり同性結婚が憲法で禁止されているという主張を繰り返すことは、まさにこの憲法の諸理念にも反する意味の無い議論とは言えないでしょうか？世論に大きな影響力のあるメディアの方にはこの点をよくお考えいただきたいと思います。
Same-sex marriage as related to the Constitution (EMA Japan’s Position Paper)
EMA Japan and EMA Japan Foundation are organizations working towards bringing same-sex marriage rights to Japan. We believe that same-sex couples have rights under the Constitution of Japan (from hereon referred to as the Constitution). As such, we are opposed to the media’s opinion that same-sex marriage rights are not recognized under the Constitution for the following reasons.
Article 24, Section 1 of the Constitution sets the provisions of marriage in Japan. Within this article it is stated that, “Marriage shall be based only on the mutual consent of both sexes…”. This was a response to the prewar practices of (1) women being forced into marriage against their will and (2) women being subjected to their husband’s control under patriarchy. At the time of the crafting of the Constitution, marriage had a historical structure where women’s rights and freedoms were neglected. The postwar Constitution thus created a foundation for the family based on the philosophy of freedom and equality between men and women. Of course for those drafting the Constitution, the primary concern in regards to marriage was the improvement of women’s rights within the institution of marriage. In those days, there was no concept or understanding of same-sex marriage and as a result there is nothing that explicitly prohibits same-sex marriage written into the Constitution.
Society’s attitude and people’s lifestyles change together with the course of time. We believe it is extremely important that the Constitution, acting as the standard of “social norms”, recognize and react to these new values and the situation of society as it stands today.
As homosexual people are to be treated the same as heterosexual people (Article 14, Section 1 of the Constitution: “Equal Under the Law”), the freedom for a person as an individual to form a family with the person one loves (Article 13, first sentence of the Constitution: “All of the people shall be respected as individuals.”), and the right to happiness (Article 13, second sentence: “… the pursuit of happiness …”) cannot be taken away. As such, EMA Japan believes that the right to marry for same-sex couples is a basic human right that – one that is even protected within Article 24 Section 1 of the Constitution.
Same-sex marriage and similar relationships are already being recognized in many developed countries in Europe and North America. Japan, being a country that is an equivalent economic power to these countries, is extremely late in not recognizing same-sex marriage. The preamble of the Constitution states, “We desire to occupy an honored place in an international society striving for … the banishment of … oppression and intolerance for all time from the earth.” Although this honorable philosophy is printed in the Constitution, Japan remains a country where same-sex couples are not treated fairly. As a developed country, Japan holding this position within international society is a national shame. Focusing on and using an illogical interpretation of the Constitution as a reason to continually reject same-sex marriage has no place within true discussion. We would like those with a large public influence in the media to give thought to these aforementioned points.
EMA Japan and EMA Japan Foundation continue to give great thought and consideration to bringing the public’s attention to same-sex marriage and deepening the conversation about the issues surrounding it. While we have respect for those who hold the opinion that same-sex marriage should be outlawed on the basis of a literal interpretation of the Constitution, we would be very grateful if those people may listen to EMA Japan’s explanations with an open heart and mind.
