2．（米国）この慰安婦問題に関しての下院の決議は立法化されておらず、従って立法的な権威は全くありません。事実の探求として、米国政府は慰安婦に関してIWG（Inter-Government working Group）と呼ばれた省庁間をまたがる組織でかなり大規模に1998年から2007年までクリントン大統領が署名した法律に基づきその戦争犯罪を調査しました。
Appeal to the decision of the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit made on August 4, 2016
(for GINGERY vs. CITY OF GLENDALEO (No. 14-56440, D.C. No.2:14-cv-01291-PA-AJW)
August 5, 2016
We are informed of the decision yesterday, and hereunder pointing out the lack of discernment in the decision.
The GAHT is in mind to appeal to a higher court against this decision. It was made of unilateral guess that the Japanese Military had forced Korean women to slavery based only on two Amicus Curiae submitted by outside organizations backing the City of Glendale, the defendant. We were ready to submit a counter Amicus Curiae, and our readiness was evident in the hearing of this June.
Major Points of our Amicus Curie were:
1. Comfort Women were not sex slaves or their lives were not slavery.
2. The resolution of the House of Representative does not have any legislative power in this comfort women issue, because it was not a legislation. From factual findings are concerned, the United States government investigated on an extensive scale the issue of Comfort Women, whether the women were enslaved and/or abducted, by making the acts and by forming the project team for its investigation called IWG (Interagency Working Group) conducted war crime investigation from 1998 to 2007 in accordance with the act proposed, examined and passed by the Congress and signed (approved) by the then President Bill Clinton on October 8, 1998.
The truth of the matter was that the IWG could not find a document related to such human right infringement by the Imperial Japanese Military, and the Global Alliance for Preserving the History of WW II in Asia (hereinafter called “GAPH ” ) undoubtedly knows this fact, but GAPH neglects it in his amicus curiae.
Therefore, the amicus curiae are not just or balanced, and shall not be referred to.
Relating to the IWG, the facts are that GAPH had sought evidences for an atrocity of Imperial Japanese Government, and could not get at the time of the year 2007. Then the main citation of GAPH’s opinions before 2007 should automatically become null?, and GAPH found a new evidence after 2007? The answer to the two questions is No!. The old interpretations such as sex-slaved comfort women, 200 thousands women hunting, etc. were refuted by new evidences and interpretations completely.
Recently the center core of Pro-sex-slaved comfort women theory was also rebutted in an academic dispute. Those who, represented by GAPH, insist on sex-slaved comfort women theory become “old bigoted guards” of non-factual history.
The court decision admits that the issue is in dispute between Japan and Korea, but as mentioned above the decision took in only the opinions of the Defendant.
From the viewpoint of justice, the decision is out of balance, and cannot be accepted by those who seek legal justice.