In brief
A Tokyo court has ruled that Japan's ban on same-sex marriage is constitutional, a decision that contradicts previous hopeful rulings in other parts of the country. The plaintiffs and their supporters expressed deep disappointment outside the courthouse, raising concerns about the country's lack of legal recognition for same-sex couples, the last G7 nation without such protections. The case will now move to the Supreme Court as advocates push for change.
A Japanese court has ruled the country's ban on same-sex marriage as constitutional - bucking a trend set by courts around the country that had raised hopes for marriage equality in Japan.
The ruling was met with disappointment from plaintiffs and their legal team who had gathered outside the Tokyo courthouse.
Japan is the only G7 country that does not fully recognise same-sex couples or offer them clear legal protection. But it's not an outlier in Asia, where only Taiwan, Thailand and Nepal offer same-sex marriages.
Ayumi Higashi, the judge who delivered the verdict, said laws on same-sex marriage should first be deliberated in parliament, the Mainichi reported.
Outside the Tokyo courthouse on Friday, the plaintiffs of the lawsuit and their legal team held up signs that read unjust verdict, local media reported.
Shino Kawachi, one of the plaintiffs, told local media that the ruling was difficult to comprehend. What is justice? Was the court even watching us? Were they considering the next generation? she asked.
Her partner, Hiromi Hatogai, said she was extremely outraged and wondered if the judiciary was on our side. But, she added, they would keep fighting.
Amnesty International described the ruling as a damaging step backwards on same-sex marriage and urged the Japanese government to push for legalisation.
This verdict is the last among six high court rulings on same-sex marriage lawsuits in Japan, with five courts previously finding the ban unconstitutional, although none awarded the plaintiffs compensation.
The Friday ruling by the Tokyo high court stands out as it contradicts the trend towards greater acceptance and legal recognition, and the cases are expected to be taken to the Supreme Court next.
