The Supreme Court of Japan has decided that all married couples in the country will share the same first name. The ruling reflects the same law that was passed 1898 requiring couples to adopt the same surname in order to legalize their marriage.
More than a century ago, before the original law was passed, women in Japan were allowed to use their maiden names even after marrying their partners. Today, however, over 90 percent of married women in the country are using their husband's last name, according to BBC.
Controversy regarding the law emerged earlier this month after five women filed a lawsuit against the Japanese government to contest the ruling. According to the complainants, forcing women to adopt a different last name violates their civil rights and strips away a huge part of their identities.
Supporters of the women also argued that giving people the freedom to choose their last names should be part of Japan's transition in moving towards a more modern era. In addition, by abolishing the law, women will be viewed as individuals.
However, despite their statements regarding the unconstitutional nature of the law, the highest court of Japan decided that the ruling does not discriminate against women. One of the plaintiffs, 80-year-old Kyoko Tsukamoto who still uses her original name despite being married, said that her identity is not officially recognized in government records because of the law, the New York Times reported.
"When I heard the ruling I started crying, and even now it hurts," she said according to the news site. "My name is Kyoko Tsukamoto, but I can't live or die as Kyoko Tsukamoto."
Advocates of the law, on the other hand, consider the court's decision as a major victory for the stability of Japan's culture. For them, maintaining the same first name can help in ensuring the strong bond of family members, The Guardian reported.
"Names are the best way to bind families," constitutional scholar Masaomi Takanori told the local television network NHK in an interview. "Allowing different surnames risks destroying social stability, the maintenance of public order and the basis of social welfare."
