Ms - Named

Discussion over Separate Surnames Begins

By Takuya Nishimura, APP Senior Fellow, Former Editorial Writer for The Hokkaido Shimbun The views expressed by the author are his own and are not associated with The Hokkaido Shimbun
You can find his blog, J Update here.
June 2, 2025. Special to Asia Policy Point

Discussion over bills that would allow married couples to use separate surnames has begun in the Committee on Judicial Affairs of Japan’s House of Representatives. Three opposition parties have proposed their own respective bills, none of which has attracted majority support in the House because the ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) opposes them. Despite domestic and international requirements for separate surnames, the Diet has failed to give married couples this flexibility.

Amid growing demands and international movements for gender equality, the Legislative Council of the Ministry of Justice released a draft in 1996 of a revised Civil Code to permit separate surnames. “When a married couple use each of their surnames before marriage, they need to decide at their marriage which name their children would use,” according to the draft. The couple themselves would be able to continue to use their unmarried names.

The United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) issued concluding observations in 2024, in which it recommended that Japan “amend legislation regarding the choice of surnames of married couples in order to enable women to retain their maiden surnames after marriage.” The convention had issued the same recommendation in 2003, 2009 and 2016.

The Japan Business Federation (Keidanren), one of the most influential supporters of the LDP, requested in 2024 that the government of Japan create a selective separate surnames system for women. Women in Japan may and do use their maiden names for business abroad, but legal inconveniences arise in foreign countries since their maiden names have no legal basis and are not described in their passports.

Nevertheless, conservative lawmakers in the LDP have blocked the amendment of the Civil Code, which currently requires a married couple to use one of their surnames, reflecting a concern that separate surnames would destroy the traditional shape of the family. They have not explained, however, how separate surnames will cause a family to collapse. Although some LDP lawmakers understand the necessity of separate surnames, the majority in the party has yet to do so.

With the decline of LDP power in the Diet after the October 2024 Lower House election, the opposition parties have tried to sustain momentum for amendment of the Civil Code. The Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan (CDPJ) submitted a bill in April, which included the suggestions of the Legislative Council in 1996. The Democratic Party for the People (DPP) proposed their own bill that would require a couple, as soon as they married, to register the surname that would be used for their children but that would allow the wife to use her unmarried surname.

The Japan Innovation Party (Nippon Ishin-no Kai) takes more conservative stance. Ishin’s bill would not allow separate surnames but would have a couple create a “common name” in family registration. The LDP decided against submitting their own bill in the current session of the Diet after long internal discussion.

Some conservative lawmakers, including Ms. Sanae Takaichi, argue that using a common name can be an alternative to separate surnames. Komeito favors a system for separate surnames, but thinks it is too early to resolve the issue.

It is not unusual for a Diet member to use their maiden name for their activities. For example, “real” name of Rui Matsukawa (LDP) is Rui Arai. While she discusses policies in the Diet as Rui Matsukawa, she needs to be Rui Arai in family registration or in foreign travel as a Diet member. Giving maiden name a legal status may be a good first step for lawmakers to make their political activities easier.

With no prospect that any one of the three bills from CDPJ, DPP, and Ishin could pass, the Chairwoman of the Committee on Judicial Affairs, Chinami Nishimura (CDPJ), has begun discussions in the committee on the surname issue. Of the 35 seats in the committee, the opposition parties hold 19. Two of the 19 oppose separate surnames. With these two members in dissent, the opposition parties cannot muster a majority to pass a bill.

If the Diet does not pass a bill by the end of the current session, the committee may discard some or all the bills or hold them over the next session. Chairwoman Nishimura reportedly aims to hold votes on the bills to draw a clear contrast between the ayes and the nays. The opposition continues to hold out remote hope that it can persuade enough LDP lawmakers to vote against the policy of their party.

In a May poll by Kyodo News, 71 percent of respondents supported a legal process for selective separate surnames, dwarfing the 27 percent who oppose the idea. Even if no bill passes the Diet, it will be good enough for the opposition: they can show, before the Upper House election in July, that the LDP was unable to deliver legislation favored by the majority of Japan’s citizens.