Japan's High Court Declares Same-Sex Marriage Ban Unconstitutional
- Esther
- Nov 1, 2024
- 2 min read

The Tokyo High Court ruled that Japan's ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional, marking a step forward for LGBTQ+ rights in the country.
This ruling shows the court's recognition of the right to equality under the Japanese Constitution, which the current legal framework fails to uphold by denying same-sex couples the ability to marry.
The court's decision aligns with a previous ruling from the Sapporo High Court, reinforcing the notion that the lack of legal recognition for same-sex marriages leads to "discriminatory treatment based on sexual orientation."
Presiding Judge Sonoe Taniguchi emphasized the importance of respecting a person's right to a spousal relationship, stating that "the degree of social acceptance for granting same-sex couples the same protection as heterosexuals has heightened considerably."
Despite this judicial victory, the court dismissed the plaintiffs' demand for damages, citing the absence of a Supreme Court ruling on the matter.
The seven plaintiffs, including same-sex couples, had sought compensation from the state, arguing that the civil law provisions violate their constitutional rights to equality and freedom of marriage.
Japan remains the only G7 nation without legal recognition of same-sex marriages or civil unions, facing increasing pressure from its LGBT community and supporters to enact legislative reforms.
The ruling highlights the ongoing legal and social challenges within Japan, as the government grapples with aligning its policies with international standards on marriage equality.
Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshimasa Hayashi acknowledged the significance of the issue, noting that the introduction of a same-sex marriage system "concerns the fundamentals of people's lives and is closely related to each person's view of the family."
As Japan navigates these complex debates, this landmark ruling may serve as a catalyst for further legal discourse and advocacy efforts aimed at achieving marriage equality.
Comments