Vinuya et al. v. Executive Secretary et al.

Country of proceedings: Philippines
Context of crimes: Asia-Pacific, World War II (Japan)
Date: 2010
Keywords: Crimes against humanity (rape/sexual slavery), accountability (head of state, state organs)

G.R. No. 162230

Court Documents
28-04-2010 - Supreme Court of the Philippines Judgment

Other information
10-08-2010 - Statement by Japanese Prime Minister Naoto Kan [in English] [in Korean] [in Japanese]
04-01-1996 - UN Doc. E/CN.4/1996/53/Add.1 - Report on the mission to the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, the Republic of Korea and Japan on the issue of military sexual slavery in wartime
15-08-1995 - Murayama Statement [in English] [in Korean] [in Japanese]

Presentation of the case
Vinuya et al. v. Executive Secretary et al. concerns a petition filed by the Malaya Lolas NGO on behalf of victims of rape in the Philippines committed by Japanese military forces during WWII. The petition on behalf of the group of ‘Comfort Women’ sought to compel the Philippine government to demand an official apology and seek reparations from the Japanese government, in particular before the International Court of Justice.

In a heavily-criticized decision, the Supreme Court of the Philippines dismissed the petition for lack of merit. The Court held that the Executive had already decided to waive claims against the Japanese government in the 1951 Treaty of Peace, the efficacy of which it did not have to power to question. The Court declared that despite its sympathy for the victims, it was not within their power to order the Executive to take up the petitioners’ claims.

“For us to overturn the Executive Department’s determination would mean an assessment of the foreign policy judgments by a coordinate political branch to which authority to make that judgment has been constitutionally committed”

On 4 December 2001, the Women’s International War Crimes Tribunal on Japan’s Military Sexual Slavery, a people’s tribunal established by Asian women, human rights organisations and international NGO’s, rendered its final judgment. The Tribunal found that the “comfort system” was designated and maintained to facilitate the rape and sexual slavery of tens of thousands of women and girls, being so widespread and organised that no other conclusion could be reached than that it was in essence, “state-sanctioned rape and enslavement”.

Related case

The 'Comfort Women' case