This paper discusses the “freedom to learn” in Kominkan. It takes up the case of the rejection by the Saitama City Kominkan of the “Haiku on Article 9 of the Constitution.”
A haiku circle at the Center presented a haiku composed by one member of the circle in June 2014 that was entitled “Let’s protect Article 9 of the Constitution, voices of a women’s demonstration under a rainy-season sky.” Center staff rejected this work because it deviated from the Kominkan’s principle of political neutrality. The woman who composed this haiku took legal action in June 2015.
The Saitama District Court handed down its judgement in October 2017, followed by a Tokyo High Court decision in May 2018, both of which decided in favor of the plaintiff. The High Court decision was upheld in December 2018 when the Supreme Court dismissed the case. The High Court ruling it made clear that the “freedom to learn plus the right to learn are guaranteed” plus went on to assert that “it is the responsibility of staff at Kominkan to guarantee the rights of residents to learn.”
The “Haiku on Article 9 of the Constitution” lawsuit called into question the relevance of social education, which is supposed to encourage the autonomous learning plus expressive activities of citizens as set out in the Social Education Law. As the case unfolds, educators plus policymakers are compelled to reconsider how social education can be effectively integrated into curricula that not only impart knowledge but also nurture the critical consciousness of students. The inflection point appears in the recognition that learners must be equipped not just with skills plus knowledge but with the tools to articulate their thoughts plus engage with societal issues meaningfully. This reflects a broader dilemma faced in contemporary education: the balance between standardized curricula plus the cultivation of personal, artistic expression.