Celeste L. Arrington
The George Washington University
Look beyond rulings to see the
social changes radiating out from post-WWII compensation lawsuits in East Asia
Since the 1990s, Koreans have filed dozens of lawsuits in Japanese, U.S., and Korean courts seeking compensation for their suffering during Japan’s colonial rule over the Korean peninsula from 1910-1945. If one only considers the rulings in these cases, a bleak picture emerges. Plaintiffs lost most cases. However, stopping there overlooks how these lawsuits have helped produce a myriad of other outcomes. They have indirectly helped build collective identities, reframe debates over shared memories, provide political leverage to push for new statutes that give financial assistance to World War II-era victims, and sometimes even serve as venues for transnational interpersonal reconciliation. But how do litigants attain such indirect effects of litigation? By what mechanisms does litigation help litigants achieve such outcomes?
Drawing on original interviews
with lawyers, plaintiffs, journalists, and citizen activists, the article, “The Mechanisms behind Litigation’s ‘Radiating Effects’: Historical Grievances against Japan,” unpacks how these
lawsuits have contributed to social change. I identify twenty often interacting
mechanisms that can be activated by litigation processes, from a lawsuit’s
filing to the ultimate ruling and beyond. Certainly, litigation can spur
backlash or have other negative consequences, but I focus on the indirect
effects that are productive for plaintiffs. Often, social movements
strategically leverage features of the process of filing claims and fighting
them in court to their advantage. They might organize supporter groups to fill
the seats in the courtroom to signal the case’s importance to judges. The
adversarial nature of litigation also dramatizes the issue, which makes for
interesting stories that appeal to news outlets. And the fact that courts are
hearing a case may provide enough political cover for a lawmaker to raise the
issue in parliament.[1]
In addition, lawsuits by foreign plaintiffs can bring them into contact with
citizens of the former perpetrator country, and sometimes facilitate the types
of intergroup discussions that researchers find reduces prejudice. Identifying
such mechanisms behind what Marc Galanter once called litigation’s “radiating
effects” helps us understand how litigants capitalize on potential synergies
between the courts and other venues of activism.[2]
The research, which includes
analysis of media and scholarly accounts
and court and movement documents from Japan and Korea, also sheds light on some
of the distinctive features of the litigation process in these countries. For
example, discontinuous trials, with court hearings held only once every few
months, can make it difficult to sustain momentum in activism, but the court
hearings also become opportunities for public events, press conferences, and
gatherings that build solidarity and a shared identity among plaintiffs, their
lawyers, and citizens who support them.[3] In some cases, elderly Korean plaintiffs
in wheelchairs were covered with sheets of handwritten notes from individual
Japanese and Korean supporters as they proceeded into Japanese courts past
banks of news cameras. Not only does this article raise awareness of the
broader impact postwar compensation lawsuits in East Asia, it also contributes
non-Western and transnational cases to scholarship on litigation’s indirect
effects. These lawsuits are about contested historical legacies that continue
to complicate inter-state relations in Northeast Asia, between the United
States’ two key allies: Japan and South Korea. If you peel back the layers,
however, they are also spurring fascinating social changes.
[1]
Thomas
M. Keck, “Beyond Backlash: Assessing the Impact of Judicial Decisions on LGBT
Rights,” Law & Society Review 43, no. 1 (March 1, 2009): 151–86.
[2]
Marc
Galanter, “The Radiating Effects of Courts,” in Empirical Theories about
Courts, ed. Keith O. Boyum and Lynn Mather (New York: Longman, 1983),
117–42.
[3]
See
also Robert L. Kidder and Setsuo Miyazawa, “Long-Term Strategies in Japanese
Environmental Litigation,” Law & Social Inquiry 18 (1993): 605–28.
