[Special Feature: Re-examining "Exclusionism"] Natsuki Yasuda: Thinking About the Path to Coexistence from the Frontlines of Discrimination Against Foreigners in Japan

It would not be an exaggeration to say that the July 2025 House of Councillors election was an election where the "foreigner problem was manufactured." Hoaxes proliferated, claiming that "foreigners are receiving preferential treatment through welfare" or that "public safety is deteriorating due to the increase in foreigners." The Sansei Party, which increased its seats, actively promoted the slogan "Japanese First"—a slogan that introduces a hierarchy to human life.

"I've never prayed so hard for an election period to end quickly—"

A foreign-national friend born in Japan sent me a message just after the voting deadline for the Upper House election, saying they were "scared to go outside every day." Elections are supposed to be one of the vital mechanisms supporting democracy. Yet, why are there people who must live in fear during that election period?

According to the Ministry of Justice's "White Paper on Crime," while Japan's foreign population grew significantly over 20 years—from 1.97 million in 2004 (including short-term stays) to 3.77 million in 2023—the number of foreigners arrested for criminal offenses decreased by more than 30% during the same period.

Despite this, an "image" of foreigners as a "threat to society" is being disseminated, and while election campaigns turn into megaphones for hate and misinformation, my friend cannot say "NO" to this through voting because they hold foreign citizenship. The target of discrimination is directed through elections at the very people who find it difficult to express their will through elections—this asymmetry itself was violent.

This is not a problem limited to the Sansei Party. During the Liberal Democratic Party presidential election in October, Sanae Takaichi, who would later become Prime Minister, linked "violence against the deer in Nara" with "foreigners" in her policy announcement. She also developed unsubstantiated claims, stating, "I often hear that police cannot arrange interpreters in time and are forced to drop charges against foreigners." Although reports of rebuttals from the field and relevant parties followed, the remarks were neither retracted nor corrected.

After taking office as Prime Minister, Takaichi instructed the "optimization" of systems related to foreigners at a relevant ministerial meeting, stating, "A situation has arisen where citizens feel anxiety and unfairness regarding illegal acts and deviations from rules by some foreigners." However, to reiterate, no statistical facts suggest that crimes by foreigners are increasing along with the increase in foreign residents.

"Illegal acts and deviations from rules" should be dealt with regardless of nationality. Takaichi says she "draws a line against exclusionism," but the moment she goes out of her way to emphasize "by foreigners," the "effect" of communicating an exclusionary message is created. Isn't this stance of the government actually fueling unnecessary anxiety?

If "anxiety and unfairness" are the issues, then politicians should be expected to act and speak in ways that prevent vague "anxiety" from leading to hate speech or hate crimes. They should be racking their brains over how the state can implement support for language assistance and coexistence in local communities—tasks that have been left entirely to local governments and the private sector until now. However, the government's attitude is the exact opposite.

While this is happening, the "problems faced by foreigners" remain neglected. In June 2021, an incident occurred where the problem of discrimination by public authority and hate speech from citizens struck simultaneously. The victims were Ms. A, a Muslim woman from South Asia living in Tokyo, and her daughter, who was three years old at the time. According to the complaint in the lawsuit Ms. A later filed, while Ms. A was letting her daughter play in a neighborhood park, a man, Mr. B, who was in the park, suddenly approached the eldest daughter and claimed that "my son was kicked (by Ms. A's daughter)."

Although Ms. A consistently maintained that "my daughter did not kick him," Mr. B repeatedly shouted hate speech, saying, "Foreigners have no value in living," "Foreigners go home," and "Garbage."

Following Mr. B's report, as many as six police officers rushed to the park, but the police took Ms. A and her daughter to the police station instead of Mr. B. Furthermore, there was a scene where the young daughter was separated from Ms. A and questioned alone by multiple officers. Ms. A and her daughter had been at the park since before noon that day, and it was nearly 8:00 PM by the time they finally returned home after the questioning.

Before Ms. A left the station, an officer asked her to consent to providing her contact information to Mr. B. Although Ms. A did not agree, the police ultimately conveyed Ms. A's name and address to Mr. B. Moreover, an officer went out of their way to visit Mr. B's home in person to deliver it. The police explained the reason was that Mr. B said he would file a civil lawsuit against Ms. A, but why did the police go ahead of that lawsuit to facilitate one side's convenience?

It would not have been surprising if Mr. B, who repeatedly used hate speech, barged into Ms. A's home at any time. Overcome with fear, Ms. A was forced to move.

Claiming illegal and unjust execution of duties by police officers, Ms. A and her daughter became plaintiffs and filed a lawsuit in the Tokyo District Court in September 2022, seeking a total of 4.4 million yen in consolation money from the Tokyo Metropolitan Government. However, in May 2024, the Tokyo District Court dismissed the plaintiffs' claims.

The court acknowledged the "abusive language" by Mr. B. The defendant, the Tokyo Metropolitan Government, did not dispute the fact that Ms. A's three-year-old daughter was questioned alone or that Ms. A's personal information was handed to Mr. B. However, the ruling almost entirely accepted the police's side of the story and deemed that Ms. A had "consented" to them.

Actually, at the time of the incident, a man, Mr. C, happened to be passing by and intervened between Ms. A and Mr. B, and he also testified in court. According to Mr. C, an officer spoke to Ms. A's daughter in a harsh tone, saying things like, "Can you really not speak Japanese?" and "You're the one who kicked him anyway, aren't you?" However, the ruling did not acknowledge these actions, stating it was "somewhat abrupt" and "unnatural as the conduct of a police officer."

Yet, there are countless examples of unjust behavior by the police. In February 2024, an officer guarding a Kurdish exclusion protest in Warabi City, Saitama Prefecture, referred to citizens opposing discrimination as "trash." In October 2016, a member of the Osaka Prefectural Police riot squad used the word "dojin" (savage) against citizens protesting base construction in Okinawa.

Furthermore, lawsuits have arisen regarding the issue of "racial profiling," such as questioning based on discrimination or prejudice. Internal documents from the Aichi Prefectural Police revealed during the trial process, titled "Work Materials: Field Response Handbook for Young Police Officers — You're a Veteran from Today!", state the following:

"Maintain a firm conviction that those who are clearly identifiable as foreigners and do not speak Japanese are definitely committing some illegal act, such as not carrying a passport, illegal residency/overstaying, drug possession/use, or carrying handguns/swords/knives, and conduct thorough questioning and belongings inspections."

Ms. A subsequently appealed, and in October 2025, the Tokyo High Court ordered the Tokyo Metropolitan Government to pay a total of 660,000 yen in compensation. However, the court only recognized the illegality of the personal information leak, and like the Tokyo District Court ruling, it was based on the premise that Ms. A had consented to the information being provided.

"My daughter was treated terribly at the age of three and is suffering from anxiety, depression, and nightmares. She is still receiving psychiatric treatment and cannot sleep without medication. Why do the judges believe it is legal for police officers to question and threaten a three-year-old girl alone in a small room?"

At a press conference after the High Court ruling, Ms. A made this appeal with a trembling voice.

If the government is to take "measures" regarding issues involving foreigners now, shouldn't the enactment of a comprehensive anti-discrimination law to respond to such damage and the swiftest possible establishment of a human rights remedy institution independent of the government be required? This is even more true given the reality that public authority itself can be the subject of discrimination.

To be sure, even if we simply say "coexistence," various trials and errors are necessary for people with different backgrounds and roots to share the same space. However, there are already regions that have accumulated such experiences.

Every year, sixth graders at Sakura Elementary School in Sakuramoto, Kawasaki Ward, Kanagawa Prefecture, experience making kimchi, a Korean dish. The "teachers" who advise the children are Zainichi Korean "halmoni" (grandmothers) with roots in the Korean Peninsula.

The halmoni regularly gather at "Fureai-kan," a public facility in Kawasaki City created for purposes such as eliminating discrimination from the community, where they engage in various activities like writing essays and trying their hand at puppet shows. In Sakuramoto, where diverse people live—including long-term Zainichi Korean residents and those with roots in Central and South America or Southeast Asia—"Fureai-kan" has become a sanctuary for people in the community across generations.

Before the kimchi making that day, 94-year-old Seok Il-bun spoke about her experiences on behalf of the halmoni.

"Kimchi is nutritious and liked by everyone now, but it wasn't like that in the past."

Touching on the history of colonial rule, she said with a lively voice, "When I had kimchi in my lunch box at school, I was bullied and discriminated against, being told it 'stinks of kimchi' or 'stinks of garlic.' It feels like a dream to be so happy that everyone likes that hated kimchi now and we are pickling it together."

In the cooking room, the children divided into groups and, while interacting with the halmoni at each table, kneaded yangnyeom—a seasoning mixed with chili peppers, garlic, and other ingredients—between the leaves of the Chinese cabbage.

The halmoni watched with warm smiles as the children excitedly took their respective kimchi home, saying things like, "Maybe I'll make a hot pot," or "I'll eat it with white rice."

It wasn't just Ms. Il-bun who faced discrimination. One halmoni said she became unable to eat kimchi at all after her own child was bullied for "stinking of kimchi," and another halmoni was never able to attend school because she was told "women don't need an education." The children take these experiences and words home along with the kimchi. This has become an awareness for the community and a foundation for "living together."

Sakuramoto was targeted by hate demonstrations in 2015 and 2016. At the time, the police and administration were unable to respond fully, saying there was "no legal basis to stop the demonstrations." Even so, the foundation of "living together" did not waver. Local people raised their voices, and in May 2016, the Hate Speech Elimination Act was passed in the Diet, although it is a law of principles. Then, in December 2019, the nation's first hate speech prohibition ordinance that makes hate speech subject to criminal penalties was passed with unanimous approval from all parties in the Kawasaki City Council.

Such precedents already exist. Isn't now the time to learn from them and move the framework of society itself forward?