Draft:Gimu

Gimu (義務, gimu) is a Japanese term that refers to a duty or obligation, something a person is expected or required to carry out. These obligations may be grounded in reason, morality, ethics, religion, legal systems such as statutes or contracts, or established social customs. Failing to fulfill a gimu can result in sanctions that may be psychological, physical, or social.

The term gimu is thought to have been coined by the philosopher Nishi Amane.^[1]

Types of obligations

The nature of an obligation (gimu) depends on its underlying foundation. This article groups obligations into four broad categories: religious obligations, moral and ethical obligations, social obligations, and legal obligations. In practice, a single obligation may stem from more than one source, and the dominant basis can vary by historical era or cultural setting. This classification is intended as a practical framework, not a rigid taxonomy.

Religious obligations

Religious obligations are duties derived from sacred texts, doctrines, or religious authorities. In the context of Japanese society, these may arise from traditions such as Buddhism and Shinto, where practices like ancestor veneration, ritual purity, and offerings are seen as moral imperatives. In other religious contexts, such as Judaism, Christianity, or Islam, obligations may include adherence to divine commandments, ritual law, or personal piety. These duties are typically viewed as absolute and non-negotiable within their faith systems.

Moral and ethical obligations

In Japanese ethical thought, moral obligations often reflect Confucian ideals of harmony, self-discipline, and duty toward family and society.^{[citation needed]} In moral discourse, obligations are often referred to as oughts (当為, tōi).

The Stoics viewed adherence to a universal natural law, grounded in logos (reason), as both a moral duty and an expression of virtue.^{[citation needed]}

Immanuel Kant argued that practical reason compels human beings to live by moral laws supported by supersensible ideas such as the highest good, the immortality of the soul, and God. Because people are also influenced by sensuous desires, these moral laws appear as internal and voluntary imperatives, which he called the categorical imperative.^{[citation needed]}

Jürgen Habermas rejected metaphysical foundations like the categorical imperative. Instead, he held that moral obligations arise through dialogic reason, specifically mutual agreement and recognition in discourse.^{[citation needed]}

Social obligations

Social obligations are duties regarded as binding based on a person's status or role within a community. They are often referred to as social responsibilities. Such obligations may vary depending on one's occupation, social class, family position, regional affiliation, or organizational membership. These duties may be continuous or episodic, shaped by the structure and expectations of the social relationships involved.^{[citation needed]}

Legal obligations (under positive law)

In a modern nation-state, legal obligations, also called obligations under positive law, refer to duties established by law through political authority, typically legislation enacted by a representative parliament on behalf of the people. These obligations may fall under private law, such as civil law, as well as criminal law or procedural law.

Substantively, legal obligations may arise in two ways:

imposed by the state on its constituents, or
created between individuals, as recognized and enforced by law.

In modern constitutional systems, individuals may be understood to bear obligations toward the state to uphold the rights and freedoms of others. Consequently, legal obligations must conform to constitutional law provisions that protect human rights.

Legal obligations may originate either:

from statutes or regulations (hōrei), or
through legal acts such as contracts.

Although obligations under private law are typically fulfilled voluntarily, non-performance may result in state intervention through compulsory execution (kyōsei shikkō). Violations of criminal law are subject to state-imposed penalties. In administrative contexts, breaches of obligations may lead to administrative sanctions.^{[citation needed]}

Terms containing "gimu"

This section outlines several compound terms used in Japanese law and society that include the word gimu (義務). These terms may not always align precisely with the general definitions discussed above.

Legal obligations in Japan under positive law

Under Japanese law, legal obligations can be classified based on whether they require a person to perform an act or refrain from one. These are referred to as duties to act (作為義務, sakuigimu) and duties to refrain (不作為義務, fusakuigimu). This distinction is particularly important in the context of enforcement mechanisms and legal theories concerning omission offenses.

Duty to act: An obligation to perform a specific act, such as the legal requirement to repay a loan.
- Substitutable duty to act: A duty that can be carried out by someone other than the original obligor. For example, the obligation to remove an illegally moored boat may be fulfilled by a third party.
- Non-substitutable duty to act: A duty that must be fulfilled by a specific individual. For example, a renowned pianist contracted to perform a solo concert cannot be substituted.

Duty to refrain: An obligation to abstain from certain actions prohibited by law.
- Example: A court order requiring a stalker to maintain a distance of 500 meters from the victim.
- Example: A contractual non-compete clause that restricts certain types of employment.

Constitutional obligations

Several types of obligations are articulated in the Constitution of Japan.

Modern constitutional frameworks define both the rights of citizens and the obligations of the state. Constitutions are intended to protect the natural rights and freedoms of individuals while limiting state authority. In this view, the primary constitutional obligation rests not on citizens, but on public officials—the duty to respect and uphold the Constitution (憲法尊重擁護義務).

In Japan, this duty is set out in Article 99 of the Constitution of Japan, which states: "The Emperor or the Regent, and Ministers of State, Members of the Diet, judges, and all other public officials have the obligation to respect and uphold this Constitution."

While the state may impose obligations on citizens, these are intended to reconcile competing rights—such as those involving the public welfare—and must be legislated in accordance with the rule of law. As such, most citizen obligations are treated as legal duties under statutory law, rather than as constitutionally enforceable rules. Obligations written into the constitution often serve as ethical principles or legislative intent rather than binding mandates.

The Constitution outlines three primary duties of citizens:

the duty of education (Article 26, paragraph 2)
the duty to work (Article 27, paragraph 1)
the duty to pay taxes (Article 30)

These are collectively known as the "three great duties of the people" (国民の三大義務). Unlike the constitutions of early modern democracies such as the United States and France, many constitutions incorporate duties into their human rights provisions.^[a]^[2]

In Japan's Constitution, these duties appear in Chapter III, titled "The Rights and Duties of the People."^[b]

The "duty of education" is a parental obligation to ensure that dependent children receive compulsory education, not a child's obligation to attend school. While formally imposed by the state, this duty is substantively interpreted as one directed toward the child.^[3]^[4]

An additional constitutional obligation appears in Article 12, which states that citizens must uphold the freedoms and rights guaranteed by the Constitution through "constant endeavor," and must not abuse these rights but use them for the public welfare. This is referred to as the duty to preserve human rights. Although not legally enforceable, it is regarded as an ethical directive reinforcing civic responsibility.^[5]

Under the prewar Meiji Constitution, the "three great duties of subjects" (臣民の三大義務) were military conscription (Article 20), taxation (Article 21), and education (as prescribed by the Imperial Rescript on Education). The constitution's second chapter, which defined rights, was titled "Rights and Duties of Subjects." At the time, the concept of natural rights was not well developed in Japanese legal thought. Civil liberties were broadly limited by the phrase "within the limits of law," enabling significant legislative restriction. Obligations to the state were thus emphasized as fundamental.

References

Notes

^ France amended its constitution in 2004 to include environmental rights and duties via the Charter for the Environment, and revised its preamble accordingly. See: 那須俊貴ほか (2007). シリーズ憲法の論点14―環境権の論点― [Constitutional Issues Series 14: Environmental Rights] (in Japanese). 国立国会図書館調査及び立法考査局. ndldm:1001031.
^ The initial GHQ draft did not include the three major obligations. The March 6, 1946 outline introduced the duty of education; the duties of taxation and labor were added during Diet deliberations.

Citations

^ 毎日新聞社, ed. (1998). 話のネタ [Conversation Starters] (in Japanese). PHP文庫. p. 55.
^ 衆議院憲法調査会事務局. "基本的人権と公共の福祉に関する基礎的資料" [Basic materials on fundamental human rights and the public welfare] (PDF) (in Japanese). p. 43. Retrieved 2025-05-14.
^ Nonaka et al. 2006, p. 535.
^ "Grand Bench decision", Minshū (in Japanese), vol. 18, no. 2, Supreme Court of Japan, p. 343, 26 February 1964
^ Nonaka et al. 2006, p. 534.

Works cited

Nonaka, Toshihiko; Nakamura, Mutsuo; Takahashi, Kazuyuki; Takami, Katsutoshi (2006). 憲法 I [Constitution I] (in Japanese) (4th ed.). Yūhikaku. ISBN 978-4-641-12998-6.