Six couples have taken legal action against the Japanese government over a law mandating that married spouses share the same surname, marking the latest challenge to a century-old tradition that many argue perpetuates inequality and inflicts personal and practical harm.
The lawsuit, filed by ten plaintiffs, including both legal and common-law couples, in a Tokyo district court and one couple in Sapporo, coincided with International Women’s Day, emphasizing the disproportionate impact of the law on women. Should the Supreme Court rule the law unconstitutional, it would proceed to parliamentary review.
Previous legal challenges, including one in 2021, were dismissed by the top court, but mounting awareness of the professional setbacks endured by women has fueled calls for change. This momentum emboldens the lawyers and plaintiffs behind the current lawsuit.
Makiko Terahara, the lead lawyer on the case who has worked on similar lawsuits in the past, expressed optimism, stating, “More and more male managers are in favor of a system where married couples can have a choice. Third time will be the charm.”
Japan’s influential business lobby group, Keidanren, known for its conservative stance, signaled support last month. Chairman Masakazu Tokura stated, “I personally think we should introduce a separate surname system,” with plans to submit a recommendation letter to the government on the issue.
The single-surname system traces back to 1898 when Japan formalized its patriarchal family structure through legislation. While technically husbands may adopt their wives’ surnames, in practice, it is typically the wife who changes her name. With an increasing number of women pursuing careers, those who retain their maiden names face daily challenges due to the discrepancy between their legal and professional identities.
The surname requirement also poses significant personal hardships. Plaintiff Megumi Ueda, an international development worker, opted not to legally marry to preserve her identity, forfeiting her partner’s parental rights to their child due to Japan’s prohibition of joint custody. Ueda expressed concern over the delay in transferring custody if she were to pass away.
Amid broad societal support for revising the law, Japan’s conservative ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) remains a major obstacle. The party’s platform advocates for upholding traditional family values, hindering legislative change.
Yukio Koike, a plaintiff, highlighted the need for flexibility, stating, “Many people would be happier if they were allowed to choose their own surname.” Even the LDP has adjusted its stance over time, allowing individuals to list both their maiden and married names on certain identification documents in 2019.
Shuhei Ninomiya, an emeritus professor specializing in family law, emphasized the ineffectiveness of political efforts to promote the use of business names.
For Ueda, changing the law is a generational imperative. “We can’t keep passing this on to the younger generation,” she remarked, underscoring the urgency of reform after decades of waiting.