The Supreme Court repeats an outdated view.

A resident South Korean woman working at a public health center in Tokyo wanted to become a section chief, but the Tokyo metropolitan government refused to let her take the exam for promotion, arguing that officials in managerial positions must be Japanese. The Supreme Court has handed down a ruling that fully endorses such a chilly treatment of non-Japanese.

The top court said, ``Officials in managerial positions in government participate in the exercise of its power; the legislative framework in Japan is not predicated on the assumption that foreigners will be in official positions where they exercise governmental power.''

In plain language, the Supreme Court's opinion is that important positions in Tokyo are to be filled exclusively by Japanese.

The court's decision is very backward-looking at a time when companies and local governments are trying to reduce discrimination in employment and promotion on the basis of nationality. The plaintiff, Chong Hyang Gyun, was born in Iwate Prefecture to a South Korean father and a Japanese mother. She was employed as a public health nurse in 1988 by the Tokyo metropolitan government.

In spring 1994, she submitted an application to take the test for a managerial post because she wanted to make a regional public-health plan of her own. But her application was rejected.

After six months of agonizing, she brought a lawsuit to the court. She was defeated in a Tokyo District Court ruling, but the Tokyo High Court overturned the ruling upon appeal. Now, the Supreme Court has blocked her way toward a managerial position, forcing her to stay in the post of subsection chief indefinitely.

The drive to eliminate discrimination was waged mainly by resident Koreans in the Kansai region. Businesses opened their doors to foreign residents, followed by local governments, the first being the municipal government of Kawasaki. They completely abolished discrimination by nationality except for staff of firefighting departments.

Large municipal governments, such as Sapporo, Nagoya, Kyoto and Fukuoka, followed suit. More than 10 prefectural governments including Tokyo also partially struck down the nationality qualification in employment.

Such a trend was given impetus by Chong's lawsuit. The high court's ruling in 1997 said the refusal to let Chong take the promotion exam was unconstitutional. The ruling had a great impact on local governments.

It is worrying that the Supreme Court's overturning of the high court's ruling may intimidate local governments and thus end the door-opening trend in favor of foreign residents' employment and promotion.

It should be noted that there are no laws prohibiting non-Japanese civil servants from being promoted to managerial positions. The only document concerning this matter is the ``government's view'' issued half a century ago. It said it was taken for granted that civil servants who partake in important decision-making must have Japanese nationality. The Supreme Court's ruling repeats such outdated views.

Some may argue that if foreigners want to work in government, they should obtain Japanese nationality. But many resident foreigners do not want to do so because of their past relationship with Japan or their affection for their ancestors, loved ones or homeland.

The silver lining is the dissenting opinion expressed by two Supreme Court justices. They argued that foreigners could be promoted to managerial positions if they do not directly coerce inhabitants or if they are not in critical positions of rule over Japanese people. Such opinion is much more flexible than the Supreme Court's ruling.

Non-Japanese live in every part of the country these days. Chong speaks Japanese as her mother tongue and is experienced with sufficient knowledge in her field. She is quite willing to devote herself to serving the public. It is a loss for our society that such a talent is shackled by old-fashioned views.

The Supreme Court ruling did not say that the local governments' efforts to open employment to resident foreigners are unconstitutional. The trend toward eliminating discrimination must not be turned back.

--The Asahi Shimbun, Jan. 27(IHT/Asahi: January 28,2005)