Individual Claims: Are the Positions of the U.S. and Japanese Governments in Agreement in the American POW Forced Labor Cases

Abstract

ARTICLES INDIVIDUAL CLAIMS: ARE THE POSITIONS OF THE U.S. AND JAPANESE GOVERNMENTS IN AGREEMENT IN THE AMERICAN POW FORCED LABOR CASES? Kinue Tokudome* Azusa K. Tokudome** I. INTRODUCTION During World War II, some 27,000 American soldiers were captured by the Japanese military, and of those, over 11,000 died. 1 Many of these POWs were enslaved for the benefit of pri- vate Japanese companies. After more than half a century, surviv- ing POWs are seeking compensation from these companies in American courts. On February 6, 2003, the Court of Appeal of California, Fourth District, Division Three, dismissed one of the cases in which Mitsui and Mitsubishi were named defendants. 2 It ruled that the San Francisco Peace Treaty of 1951 had waived the claims of the plaintiffs, although it acknowledged the suffering of * Japanese journalist; graduate of the University of Chicago, with a Masters in International Relations (1988); graduate of the University of Illinois at Chicago with a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science (1985). ** Juris Doctor Candidate, Chapman University, School of Law; graduate of the University of California, San Diego, with a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science and Japanese Studies (2002). Both authors would like to thank Professor Michael J. Bazyler for his support and encouragement throughout the writing and editing pro- cess of this article. 1. Mitsubishi Materials Corp. v. Super. Ct. of Orange County, 130 Cal. Rptr. 2d 734 (2003), affd on rehearing, 6 Cal. Rptr. 3d 159 (2003). 2. Id. at 734. There are two other cases that were consolidated with this case, they are: Ethel Georgean Jaeger, et al., v. Mitsubishi Materials Corp., (No. 814594), and Myrtle Marjorie Martin v. Mitsui & Co., Ltd., etc., et al., (No. BC 216710).