Published on August 1, 2019.
This essay criticizes the structure through which left-wing Japanese NGOs have long brought information to UN human rights bodies in ways that, in the author’s view, denigrate Japan.
It discusses the imbalance of influence at the UN, Japanese government statements on the comfort women issue, coordination with anti-Japanese media, and the spread of related campaigns into issues such as hate speech and LGBT policy.

August 1, 2019.
At present, the left overwhelmingly holds the upper hand in terms of speaking power at the United Nations.
As a result, the current reality is that the human rights information about Japan reaching the Human Rights Committee is extremely biased, and the dispatch request for the rapporteur we seek has still not been realized.
This is a chapter I published on July 6, 2017, under the title: “Anti-Japanese left-wing NGOs have used it freely and thoroughly, repeatedly held large-scale events, acted as if they owned the place, and colluded with anti-Japanese media.”
This chapter explains why, the other day, Sugita Mio was subjected to that kind of bashing by left-wing childish patients—people who make their living through anti-Japanese propaganda activities—and why Shincho 45 was consequently discontinued.
What the Japanese people should have done was not to force Shincho 45 to cease publication, but to have forced the Asahi Shimbun to cease publication in August five years earlier; that is now a widely known fact.
Had that been done, the current deterioration in Japan–South Korea relations would probably not have occurred.
The following is the continuation of the previous chapter.
A pump-and-dump operation using the United Nations.
For at least nearly thirty years, Japan’s left wing has continued to bring to the United Nations “issues” designed to demean Japan.
Meanwhile, the conservative side overlooked this point.
For that reason, even though we have belatedly entered the battle at the United Nations, we are being forced into a very difficult struggle.
For example, in order to participate in the UN Human Rights Council, an organization needs a status officially recognized by the United Nations.
Only NGOs that have existed for more than two years since their establishment—that is, since the time they were officially registered as NGOs or nonprofit organizations with the relevant governmental authority—can apply for consultative status.
At the Human Rights Committee on the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights held in Geneva in July 2014, the Japan Federation of Bar Associations, the International Movement Against All Forms of Discrimination and Racism (IMADR), and Human Rights Now, which were controlling the participating NGOs, were organizations holding this Special Consultative Status, while on our side there was only the International Career Support Association.
The difference in speaking opportunities resulting from this difference in position is large, and at present the left overwhelmingly holds the upper hand in terms of speaking power at the United Nations.
As a result, the current reality is that the human rights information about Japan reaching the Human Rights Committee is extremely biased, and the dispatch request for the rapporteur we seek has still not been realized.
At the beginning, our UN delegation participated in meetings of the Human Rights Committee, a subsidiary body of the UN Human Rights Council.
The matters discussed there are submitted directly to each country as written opinions, or are placed on the agenda of the UN Human Rights Council, leading to stronger recommendations for improving human rights conditions.
The results appeared quickly: at the 63rd pre-session of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, held on July 29, 2015, statements by Sugita Mio, Yamamoto Yumiko, Tony Marano, and others led to the Japanese government issuing its views on the comfort women issue.
At the main session in February of the following year, Japanese Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs Sugiyama stated that “expressions such as ‘sex slaves’ are contrary to the facts,” that “among the materials discovered by the Japanese government, there were none that could confirm so-called forcible recruitment by the military or government authorities,” and that “it has been established that the statements made by Yoshida Seiji, as reported by the Asahi Shimbun, were false.”
That can be called a major achievement of this delegation.
And we have positioned our speech at this UN Human Rights Council as the next step.
That is because this Council is the very place where anti-Japanese left-wing NGOs have used it freely and thoroughly, repeatedly held large-scale events, acted as if they owned the place, colluded with anti-Japanese media, and for nearly twenty-six years developed a pump-and-dump campaign saying, “The United Nations says so! Correct it! Create a new law!”
Recent issues such as hate speech and LGBT issues have also been repeatedly raised in this forum.
To be continued.