« 熊本大学教職員組合、裁量労働制労使協定書使用者案問題点 | メイン | ［教育ルネサンス］「英語」は今（７）語学学校に講座委託 »
2005年02月12日
「日の丸・君が代による人権侵害」市民オンブズパーソン、「日の丸・君が代」強制問題を国連に通報
■「日の丸・君が代による人権侵害」市民オンブズパーソン
∟●「日の丸・君が代」強制問題を国連に通報
「日の丸・君が代」強制問題を国連に通報Commission/Sub-Commission Team
(1503 Procedure)
Support Services Branch,
Office of the High Commissioner for
Human Rights
United Nations Office at Geneva
1211 Geneva 10, SwitzerlandSubject: The case of Mr. N. , Mr. K. Mr. F.and many other teachers
Dear Sirs,
Many thanks for your reply to my complaint in accordance with the 1503 procedure of the Commission Human Rights. The graduation ceremony and the entrance ceremony are held in March and coming April 2005. I am wishing the disciplinary action etc. not to be repeated again over the unison at national anthem of Japan. I would like you to recommend that the freedom of the conscience is never violated in accordance with the human rights rule and Universal Declaration of Human Rights from the United Nations to Prime Minister Koizumi and governor of Tokyo Ishihara by all means. I greatly appreciate that you would reply to me on this matter.
Respectfully yours,国連人権高等弁務官殿
ＲＥ：Ｎ教師、Ｋ教師、Ｆ氏及び多数の教師の件に関して
拝啓
人権委員会の１５０３号手続きに則った私の申し立てを採用していただきありがとうございました。２００５年も来る３月と４月には、卒業式と入学式がやってきます。私は、君が代の強制を巡って再び懲戒処分が繰り返されないことを願っております。そこで私としては、世界人権宣言の良心の自由が冒されないよう、国連から日本政府と東京都都知事へ勧告を出していただければと考えています。ご返事をお待ちしています。
敬具
Commission/Sub-Commission Team
(1503 Procedure)
Support Services Branch,
Office of the High Commissioner for
Human Rights
United Nations Office at Geneva
1211 Geneva 10, Switzerland
Subject: The case of Mr. N., Mr. K. Mr. F. and many other teachers
Dear Sirs,
I enclose a complaint about the case of the above-mentioned.
Victims of the alleged violations, in accordance with the 1503
Procedure of the Commission on Human Rights.
Respectfully yours,
Complaints concerning Human Rights to be Submitted to UNHCHR
-------------------------------------------------
I. INFORMATION CONCERNING THE AUTHOR
.................................................
Indicate, by ticking the appropriate box, in which capacity you are acting:
victim of the violation or violations described below
representative of the victim or victims of the violation or violations described below
person, group of persons or organization with reliable knowledge of the
violation or violations described below
in another capacity. Specify...................
.................................................
II. INFORMATION CONCERNING THE ALLEGED FACTS
Name of the country considered by the author to be responsible for the alleged violation
Japan........................................
Human rights allegedly violated (refer, if possible, to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights)
...Article 19 of the Constitution of Japan(freedom of thought and conscience )...
Article 1 of the Japan Fundamental Law of Education(the educational purpose)
...Article 18, 19 and 26 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights........
...Article 5, 12 and 14 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child...........
Facts of the claim
The high school teacher Mr. N of Osaka-shi was acting as the teacher in charge of the graduation ceremony in the spring of 2002. The contents of the graduation ceremony were decided by the executive committee which students and the staff of school constitute. But, just before the ceremony, they were changed by the principal. Contrary to a student’s mind, “the Rising-Sun flag hoist and the singing of Kimigayo were incorporated. The students couldn’t be convinced to a sudden change and the signature activities by the students were performed. However, the principal forced the graduation ceremony, and the opinion of the students and the staff of school were disregarded. The teacher Mr. N. explained at the graduation ceremony as below. “ It was decided by the staff meeting that we do not do Kimigayo at the event of our school. You stand -- You don’t stand ? You sing ? You don’t sing ? You leave ? don’t leave ?Please judge according to your conscience. “ After then, Mr. N. covered caution disposal from the Osaka board of education by having explained the freedom of the conscience secured by the constitution, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, etc. in intelligible language.
On the basis of the “government guidelines for teaching” which the Ministry of Education defined, the principal and the Tokyo board of education emitted the Rising-Sun flag and the Kimigayo forcible command at a graduation ceremony. In spring 2004, teacher Mr. K. and 245 staff of school of Tokyo were punished by the Tokyo board of education for reasons of un-standing up at the time of singing of Kimigayo. Several teachers were canceled from the Tokyo board of education for reasons of disposal in the new reemployment and continuation reemployment which already determined after retirement, and they lost the job. Furthermore, the Tokyo board of education performed “service accident recurrence prevention training” to the disposed person in August 2004. To instruction of the national flag and a national anthem, victims thought that they wanted to be one human being first. They thought that a teacher also had the responsibility which protects the fundamental human rights of the child and parents whom the constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights set. So, they thought and took action that they could not be concerned with school activity which makes infringement of the child’s rights foreseen in school education. Although the national flag and national anthem law was enacted in August 1999, it was only defined in the text of the law that the national flag was decided to be the flag of the Rising Sun, and the national anthem was determined as Kimigayo. The law cannot serve as a basis which stands up “Kimigayo” and forces a chorus. Moreover, the “government guidelines for teaching” defines the standard about educational contents and an educational method. It is clear as the language of “guidelines” that it is the administrative guidance which cannot have legal force. Therefore, the command of the principal who deviated from such a legal interpretation , and the notification of the board of education are infringing on the freedom of the thought and conscience secured by the constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Mr. F., retired from the Itabashi high school in Tokyo two years ago. He was invited to the graduation ceremony of the Itabashi high school on March 11 , 2004. He felt the question for the state of the graduation ceremony based on the notification of the board of Tokyo capital education this year. Then, before the ceremony started, he distributed the report of the magazine about singing of Kimigayo(National anthem), and he said in a guardian seat, “ If you can do at the time of singing of Kimigayo, please taking a seat.” Consequently, he was leaved compulsorily by principals. And the principal appealed to the Itabashi police station. The Metropolitan Police Department mobilized ten or more investigations, and investigated the Itabashi high school. House criminal investigation for Mr. F’s family was performed on May 11, 2004. A series of occurrences are the personal remarks which are the retaliation to 250 of 270 graduates having taken a seat at the time of singing of Kimigayo at the Itabashi high school.
.................................................
.................................................
III. INFORMATION CONCERNING MEANS OF REDRESS USED
What steps have been taken to exhaust domestic remedies (recourse to the courts or other public authorities), by whom, when and with what results?
Mr. N. and other person asked the Osaka Personnel Commission for withdrawal of disposal , and caused statement of disagreement in May 2002. The disposed person of Tokyo submitted “the statement document of administrative disposition suspension of execution” to the Tokyo District Court in July 2004. As long as results, such as a petition to the past public organization which asks for disposal withdrawal , and judgement at a court, are seen in the same case, it is not effective for victims to aim at solution in Japan.
The police report of Mr. F. is sent to the prosecuter. The police was disregarded although the lawyer went and protested against the Itabashi police station to the summons. Although defense counsel complained to the Tokyo District Court, they were rejected. If the search warrant of a summary court and the agreement protocol of a district court are seen, the fact is distorted.
.................................................
IV. PURPOSE AND AIM OF THIS COMMUNICATION
With the influence of UNHCHR, I want UNHCHR to ask the Japanese government to cancel the caution disposal of the two staff of school of Osaka and the 246 staff of school of Tokyo , and make a reemployment person’s return to work. The victims showed before the student that the freedom of conscience ,the freedom of religious and freedom of thought were in an educational place. They showed in the attitude that there was a right which should be guaranteed by the constitution. I think that the compulsion by the national flag and the national anthem does not become the study which studies educational universal worth. Children see the staff of school’s back, and may study social worth. Disposal of the prudent staff of school is not only the staff of school’s labor problem. In order to extend a view of the world and to build peaceful international society, we need to make the school education which studies the difference between nationality, a race, religion, and thought mutually. The crime of the educational administration which disposed by stepping on at an educational place and making a picture step is serious.
I also urge UNHCHR to put pressure onto the government so that the violations to Mr. F. shall be stopped.
- End -
国連人権高等弁務官殿
ＲＥ：Ｎ教師、Ｋ教師、Ｆ氏及び多数の教師の件に関して
拝啓
人権委員会の１５０３号手続きに則っり、上記被害者の救済申立て書を同封いたします。
敬具
★侵害されたと主張する人権（たとえば世界人権宣言、経済的・社会的及び文化的権利に関する国際規約、市民的及び政治的権利に関する国際規約）
日本国憲法 第十九条 （思想及び良心の自由）
日本国教育基本法 第１条
（教育の目的）
世界人権宣言 第十八条 第十九条 第二十六条 （２）
子どもの権利条約 第５条 第１２条 第１４条
★主張する侵害と、教育・科学・文化・情報との関連性
Ｎ教師、Ｋ教師、Ｆ氏とその他２４５名のケースは、校長や教育委員会による入学・卒業式での日の丸・君が代強制の職務命令に対し、上記憲法、世界人権宣言、子供の権利条約に則って強制に従うことを拒否したケ－スである。従うことを拒否したために、被害者達は減給、懲戒等の処分を被り、人権を侵害された。
★申し立ての事実
２００２年春、大阪市の高校教師Ｎ氏は、卒業式の担当教員をしていた。卒業式の内容は生徒と教職員が構成する実行委員会で決っていたが、直前になって校長により変更された。生徒の意に反する日の丸掲揚・君が代斉唱が盛り込まれたのである。突然の変更に納得できず、生徒による署名活動が行われた。しかし、校長は生徒の意見も教職員の意見も無視し、卒業式を強行した。Ｎ教師は、『本校の行事では「君が代は実地しないと職員会議で決まっています。立つ、立たない、歌う、歌わない、退出するしないは皆さんの良心に従って判断してください』と卒業式で説明した。憲法、世界人権宣言等で保障されている良心の自由をわかりやすい言葉で説明したことによって、Ｎ教師は大阪市教育委員会から戒告処分を被った。
文部科学省が定めた「学習指導要領」を根拠に、校長や東京都教育委員会は卒業式での日の丸・君が代強制命令を発した。２００４年春、そのため、東京都のＫ教師及び東京都の教職員２４５名は、君が代斉唱時の不起立を理由に東京都教育委員会により処分された。その中の数名は、すでに決定していた退職後の新規再雇用や継続再雇用を、処分を理由に東京都教育委員会から取り消され職を失った。さらに、２００４年８月、東京都教育委員会は、被処分者に「服務事故再発防止研修」を行った。被害者たちは国旗、国歌の指導に対しては、まず一人の人間でありたいと考えた。憲法、世界人権宣言が定めた、子供と親の基本的人権を擁護する責任は教師にもあると考えた。それゆえに、学校教育において子供の人権侵害を予見させる学校活動にはかかわってはならないと考え、行動をとったのである。
１９９９年８月に国旗国歌法が成立したが、法文上にも国旗を日章旗と決め、国歌を君が代と定めたにすぎない。同法は、「君が代」を起立して斉唱を強制する根拠とはなりえない。また、「学習指導要領」は、教育の内容及び方法について、基準を定めたものである。「指導要領」の言葉のとおり、法的な強制力のもてない行政指導であることは明確である。従い、このような法的解釈を逸脱した校長の命令や教育委員会の通達は憲法、世界人権宣言で保障されている思想及び良心の自由を侵害している。
Ｆ氏は２年前に東京都の板橋高校を定年退職した。2004年3月11日に板橋高校の卒業式に招待された。彼は、東京都都教委の通達に基づく今年の卒業式のあり方に疑問を感じていた。そこで、式の始まる前に保護者席で、君が代斉唱に関する雑誌の記事を配り、「君が代斉唱のときに、できたら着席をお願いできませんか？」と語りかけた。その結果、校長たちによって強制的に退去させられた。そして、校長は板橋警察署に訴えた。3月25日に、警視庁は捜査員１０人以上を動員して板橋高校を捜査した。その後、５回以上にわたる捜査が行われた。５月１１日にＦ家は警視庁による家宅捜査が行われた。何度も警察への呼び出し状も送りつけられた。そして、１０月１６日に彼は書類送検となった。
一連の出来事は、板橋高校で君が代斉唱のときに卒業生２７０人のうち２５０人が着席したことに対する報復であり、Ｆ氏をタ－ゲットにした個人攻撃である。
★国内救済に関する情報
国内救済のために取った措置について －－裁判所、その他公的機関への訴え－－だれが、いつ、その結果を記入のこと。
Ｎ教師他は２００２年５月、大阪市人権委員会に処分の撤回を求め、不服申し立てを起こした。東京都の被処分者は、２００４年７月、東京都地方裁判所に、「行政処分執行停止の申立書」を提出した。同様のケ－スで、処分撤回を求める過去の公的機関への訴え、裁判所での判決等の結果を見る限り、日本国内で解決をはかることは被害者たちにとって効果的でない。
Ｆ氏は書類送検されている。呼び出し状に対し、弁護士が板橋署に行き抗議したが警察は無視した。弁護団は東京地裁へ抗告したが棄却された。
★通報の目的
国連人権委員会の影響力で、被害者である大阪の教職員２名と東京都の教職員２４５名の戒告処分を取り消させ、さらに再雇用者の職場復帰を実現させるよう日本政府に求めて欲しい。
被害者たちは教育の場に良心の自由や宗教の自由・思想の自由があることを生徒の前に示した。憲法で保障されるべき権利があることを態度で示した。国旗・国歌による強制は教育の普遍的な価値を学ぶ場にならないと考える。子ども達は教職員の背中をみて社会の価値を学ぶことがある。心ある教職員の処分は教職員だけの労働問題ではない。世界観を広げ平和な国際社会を構築するには、国籍・人種
・宗教・思想の違いを学び合う学校教育にしていかねばならない。教育の場で踏み絵を踏ませ、処分を行った教育行政の罪は重い。また、日本政府が国際人権基準に則り適正な勧告をおこない、Ｆ氏への書類送検が撤回されるよう仲介をお願いすることにある。
Commission/Sub-Commission Team
(1503 Procedure)
Support Services Branch,
Office of the High Commissioner for
Human Rights
United Nations Office at Geneva
1211 Geneva 10, SwitzerlandSubject: The case of Mr. N., Mr. K. Mr. F. and many other teachers
Dear Sirs,
I enclose a complaint about the case of the above-mentioned.
Victims of the alleged violations, in accordance with the 1503
Procedure of the Commission on Human Rights.
Respectfully yours,
Complaints concerning Human Rights to be Submitted to UNHCHR
-------------------------------------------------
I. INFORMATION CONCERNING THE AUTHOR
.................................................Indicate, by ticking the appropriate box, in which capacity you are acting:
victim of the violation or violations described below
representative of the victim or victims of the violation or violations described below
person, group of persons or organization with reliable knowledge of the
violation or violations described below
in another capacity. Specify...................
.................................................
II. INFORMATION CONCERNING THE ALLEGED FACTS
Name of the country considered by the author to be responsible for the alleged violation
Japan........................................
Human rights allegedly violated (refer, if possible, to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights)
...Article 19 of the Constitution of Japan(freedom of thought and conscience )...
Article 1 of the Japan Fundamental Law of Education(the educational purpose)
...Article 18, 19 and 26 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights........
...Article 5, 12 and 14 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child...........
Facts of the claim
The high school teacher Mr. N of Osaka-shi was acting as the teacher in charge of the graduation ceremony in the spring of 2002. The contents of the graduation ceremony were decided by the executive committee which students and the staff of school constitute. But, just before the ceremony, they were changed by the principal. Contrary to a student’s mind, “the Rising-Sun flag hoist and the singing of Kimigayo were incorporated. The students couldn’t be convinced to a sudden change and the signature activities by the students were performed. However, the principal forced the graduation ceremony, and the opinion of the students and the staff of school were disregarded. The teacher Mr. N. explained at the graduation ceremony as below. “ It was decided by the staff meeting that we do not do Kimigayo at the event of our school. You stand -- You don’t stand ? You sing ? You don’t sing ? You leave ? don’t leave ?Please judge according to your conscience. “ After then, Mr. N. covered caution disposal from the Osaka board of education by having explained the freedom of the conscience secured by the constitution, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, etc. in intelligible language.
On the basis of the “government guidelines for teaching” which the Ministry of Education defined, the principal and the Tokyo board of education emitted the Rising-Sun flag and the Kimigayo forcible command at a graduation ceremony. In spring 2004, teacher Mr. K. and 245 staff of school of Tokyo were punished by the Tokyo board of education for reasons of un-standing up at the time of singing of Kimigayo. Several teachers were canceled from the Tokyo board of education for reasons of disposal in the new reemployment and continuation reemployment which already determined after retirement, and they lost the job. Furthermore, the Tokyo board of education performed “service accident recurrence prevention training” to the disposed person in August 2004. To instruction of the national flag and a national anthem, victims thought that they wanted to be one human being first. They thought that a teacher also had the responsibility which protects the fundamental human rights of the child and parents whom the constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights set. So, they thought and took action that they could not be concerned with school activity which makes infringement of the child’s rights foreseen in school education. Although the national flag and national anthem law was enacted in August 1999, it was only defined in the text of the law that the national flag was decided to be the flag of the Rising Sun, and the national anthem was determined as Kimigayo. The law cannot serve as a basis which stands up “Kimigayo” and forces a chorus. Moreover, the “government guidelines for teaching” defines the standard about educational contents and an educational method. It is clear as the language of “guidelines” that it is the administrative guidance which cannot have legal force. Therefore, the command of the principal who deviated from such a legal interpretation , and the notification of the board of education are infringing on the freedom of the thought and conscience secured by the constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Mr. F., retired from the Itabashi high school in Tokyo two years ago. He was invited to the graduation ceremony of the Itabashi high school on March 11 , 2004. He felt the question for the state of the graduation ceremony based on the notification of the board of Tokyo capital education this year. Then, before the ceremony started, he distributed the report of the magazine about singing of Kimigayo(National anthem), and he said in a guardian seat, “ If you can do at the time of singing of Kimigayo, please taking a seat.” Consequently, he was leaved compulsorily by principals. And the principal appealed to the Itabashi police station. The Metropolitan Police Department mobilized ten or more investigations, and investigated the Itabashi high school. House criminal investigation for Mr. F’s family was performed on May 11, 2004. A series of occurrences are the personal remarks which are the retaliation to 250 of 270 graduates having taken a seat at the time of singing of Kimigayo at the Itabashi high school.
.................................................
.................................................III. INFORMATION CONCERNING MEANS OF REDRESS USED
What steps have been taken to exhaust domestic remedies (recourse to the courts or other public authorities), by whom, when and with what results?
Mr. N. and other person asked the Osaka Personnel Commission for withdrawal of disposal , and caused statement of disagreement in May 2002. The disposed person of Tokyo submitted “the statement document of administrative disposition suspension of execution” to the Tokyo District Court in July 2004. As long as results, such as a petition to the past public organization which asks for disposal withdrawal , and judgement at a court, are seen in the same case, it is not effective for victims to aim at solution in Japan.
The police report of Mr. F. is sent to the prosecuter. The police was disregarded although the lawyer went and protested against the Itabashi police station to the summons. Although defense counsel complained to the Tokyo District Court, they were rejected. If the search warrant of a summary court and the agreement protocol of a district court are seen, the fact is distorted.
.................................................
IV. PURPOSE AND AIM OF THIS COMMUNICATION
With the influence of UNHCHR, I want UNHCHR to ask the Japanese government to cancel the caution disposal of the two staff of school of Osaka and the 246 staff of school of Tokyo , and make a reemployment person’s return to work. The victims showed before the student that the freedom of conscience ,the freedom of religious and freedom of thought were in an educational place. They showed in the attitude that there was a right which should be guaranteed by the constitution. I think that the compulsion by the national flag and the national anthem does not become the study which studies educational universal worth. Children see the staff of school’s back, and may study social worth. Disposal of the prudent staff of school is not only the staff of school’s labor problem. In order to extend a view of the world and to build peaceful international society, we need to make the school education which studies the difference between nationality, a race, religion, and thought mutually. The crime of the educational administration which disposed by stepping on at an educational place and making a picture step is serious.
I also urge UNHCHR to put pressure onto the government so that the violations to Mr. F. shall be stopped.
- End -
国連人権高等弁務官殿
ＲＥ：Ｎ教師、Ｋ教師、Ｆ氏及び多数の教師の件に関して
拝啓
人権委員会の１５０３号手続きに則っり、上記被害者の救済申立て書を同封いたします。
敬具
★侵害されたと主張する人権（たとえば世界人権宣言、経済的・社会的及び文化的権利に関する国際規約、市民的及び政治的権利に関する国際規約）
日本国憲法 第十九条 （思想及び良心の自由）
日本国教育基本法 第１条
（教育の目的）
世界人権宣言 第十八条 第十九条 第二十六条 （２）
子どもの権利条約 第５条 第１２条 第１４条
★主張する侵害と、教育・科学・文化・情報との関連性
Ｎ教師、Ｋ教師、Ｆ氏とその他２４５名のケースは、校長や教育委員会による入学・卒業式での日の丸・君が代強制の職務命令に対し、上記憲法、世界人権宣言、子供の権利条約に則って強制に従うことを拒否したケ－スである。従うことを拒否したために、被害者達は減給、懲戒等の処分を被り、人権を侵害された。
★申し立ての事実
２００２年春、大阪市の高校教師Ｎ氏は、卒業式の担当教員をしていた。卒業式の内容は生徒と教職員が構成する実行委員会で決っていたが、直前になって校長により変更された。生徒の意に反する日の丸掲揚・君が代斉唱が盛り込まれたのである。突然の変更に納得できず、生徒による署名活動が行われた。しかし、校長は生徒の意見も教職員の意見も無視し、卒業式を強行した。Ｎ教師は、『本校の行事では「君が代は実地しないと職員会議で決まっています。立つ、立たない、歌う、歌わない、退出するしないは皆さんの良心に従って判断してください』と卒業式で説明した。憲法、世界人権宣言等で保障されている良心の自由をわかりやすい言葉で説明したことによって、Ｎ教師は大阪市教育委員会から戒告処分を被った。
文部科学省が定めた「学習指導要領」を根拠に、校長や東京都教育委員会は卒業式での日の丸・君が代強制命令を発した。２００４年春、そのため、東京都のＫ教師及び東京都の教職員２４５名は、君が代斉唱時の不起立を理由に東京都教育委員会により処分された。その中の数名は、すでに決定していた退職後の新規再雇用や継続再雇用を、処分を理由に東京都教育委員会から取り消され職を失った。さらに、２００４年８月、東京都教育委員会は、被処分者に「服務事故再発防止研修」を行った。被害者たちは国旗、国歌の指導に対しては、まず一人の人間でありたいと考えた。憲法、世界人権宣言が定めた、子供と親の基本的人権を擁護する責任は教師にもあると考えた。それゆえに、学校教育において子供の人権侵害を予見させる学校活動にはかかわってはならないと考え、行動をとったのである。
１９９９年８月に国旗国歌法が成立したが、法文上にも国旗を日章旗と決め、国歌を君が代と定めたにすぎない。同法は、「君が代」を起立して斉唱を強制する根拠とはなりえない。また、「学習指導要領」は、教育の内容及び方法について、基準を定めたものである。「指導要領」の言葉のとおり、法的な強制力のもてない行政指導であることは明確である。従い、このような法的解釈を逸脱した校長の命令や教育委員会の通達は憲法、世界人権宣言で保障されている思想及び良心の自由を侵害している。
Ｆ氏は２年前に東京都の板橋高校を定年退職した。2004年3月11日に板橋高校の卒業式に招待された。彼は、東京都都教委の通達に基づく今年の卒業式のあり方に疑問を感じていた。そこで、式の始まる前に保護者席で、君が代斉唱に関する雑誌の記事を配り、「君が代斉唱のときに、できたら着席をお願いできませんか？」と語りかけた。その結果、校長たちによって強制的に退去させられた。そして、校長は板橋警察署に訴えた。3月25日に、警視庁は捜査員１０人以上を動員して板橋高校を捜査した。その後、５回以上にわたる捜査が行われた。５月１１日にＦ家は警視庁による家宅捜査が行われた。何度も警察への呼び出し状も送りつけられた。そして、１０月１６日に彼は書類送検となった。
一連の出来事は、板橋高校で君が代斉唱のときに卒業生２７０人のうち２５０人が着席したことに対する報復であり、Ｆ氏をタ－ゲットにした個人攻撃である。
★国内救済に関する情報
国内救済のために取った措置について －－裁判所、その他公的機関への訴え－－だれが、いつ、その結果を記入のこと。
Ｎ教師他は２００２年５月、大阪市人権委員会に処分の撤回を求め、不服申し立てを起こした。東京都の被処分者は、２００４年７月、東京都地方裁判所に、「行政処分執行停止の申立書」を提出した。同様のケ－スで、処分撤回を求める過去の公的機関への訴え、裁判所での判決等の結果を見る限り、日本国内で解決をはかることは被害者たちにとって効果的でない。
Ｆ氏は書類送検されている。呼び出し状に対し、弁護士が板橋署に行き抗議したが警察は無視した。弁護団は東京地裁へ抗告したが棄却された。
★通報の目的
国連人権委員会の影響力で、被害者である大阪の教職員２名と東京都の教職員２４５名の戒告処分を取り消させ、さらに再雇用者の職場復帰を実現させるよう日本政府に求めて欲しい。
被害者たちは教育の場に良心の自由や宗教の自由・思想の自由があることを生徒の前に示した。憲法で保障されるべき権利があることを態度で示した。国旗・国歌による強制は教育の普遍的な価値を学ぶ場にならないと考える。子ども達は教職員の背中をみて社会の価値を学ぶことがある。心ある教職員の処分は教職員だけの労働問題ではない。世界観を広げ平和な国際社会を構築するには、国籍・人種
・宗教・思想の違いを学び合う学校教育にしていかねばならない。教育の場で踏み絵を踏ませ、処分を行った教育行政の罪は重い。また、日本政府が国際人権基準に則り適正な勧告をおこない、Ｆ氏への書類送検が撤回されるよう仲介をお願いすることにある。
投稿者 管理者 : 2005年02月12日 00:30
トラックバック
このエントリーのトラックバックURL:
http://university.main.jp/cgi311/mt/mt-tb.cgi/632