Why Japan’s Disability Law Still Fails Disabled Students

Our recent story about a disabled student’s battle to take the entrance exam sheds light on some of the deeper problems that disabled students face in Japan. The law now requires both public and private schools to provide accommodations. Yet many students still struggle to access the support they need.

Why does this gap exist despite legal mandates? We spoke to a Japanese legal expert who gave us some insights.

Disability law falls short in schools despite expanded mandate

I spoke with attorney Nakagawa Akira, who has handled lawsuits and administrative reviews related to the schooling of students with disabilities since 1984. He explained the legal background, current issues, and shared his insights on the Act for Eliminating Discrimination against Persons with Disabilities.

The law took effect on April 1, 2016. It requires public schools to provide reasonable accommodations for students with disabilities.

The latest amendment, enacted in April 2024, expanded this requirement to private schools. The law now applies to both public and private educational institutions.

Despite this, many schools still fail to provide proper support. The Chiba entrance exam case highlights how institutions struggle to meet their legal obligations.

Language gaps and legal loopholes: flaws in Japan’s disability law leave students behind

Nakagawa explained why students with disabilities still face barriers, despite the existence of the law.

Issue 1: Vague wording undermines “reasonable accommodation”

Nakagawa pointed to a key flaw: the Japanese translation of “reasonable accommodation” (合理的配慮; gouritekihairyo). In Japanese, “accommodation” is rendered as hairyo, meaning “consideration” or “kindness.” He said this phrasing is too subjective.

He argued that the law should have used more concrete terms, such as “reasonable measures” (合理的措置; gouritekisochi) or “reasonable adjustments” (合理的調整; gouritekichousei). These would emphasize obligation rather than goodwill.

For example, during entrance exams, some schools treat accommodation (配慮; hairyo) as simple kindness. They may believe showing basic courtesy satisfies the law. However, this interpretation can leave students without the concrete support they need.

In practice, schools often say they “considered” the student’s situation and stop there. Even when the support is clearly lacking, that claim can end the discussion.

Nakagawa emphasized that this vague language gives schools an easy excuse. They can say they acted in good faith while denying actual accommodations.

Issue 2: No penalties for violating the law

The 2024 amendment to the Act for Eliminating Discrimination against Persons with Disabilities made reasonable accommodations mandatory at both public and private schools. However, Nakagawa pointed out a serious flaw: the law carries no penalties.

Even if schools fail to act or refuse accommodations, they face no legal consequences. He explained that schools found in violation are not punished directly. Instead, victims must file lawsuits seeking compensation.

In these cases, courts examine whether the school violated the law. Judges also assess the harm suffered by the student or parents and then determine the damages.

Because the law lacks penalties, most victims rely on civil lawsuits. In theory, they can also demand specific performance, asking courts to order concrete action. Yet, in practice, Japan’s legal process makes such claims hard to pursue.

The attorney noted that Japan has adopted laws similar to those in Europe and the United States. However, key differences remain. The Japanese law lacks clear standards and enforcement tools.

Nakagawa argued that Japan should have followed the model used by the United States. The Americans with Disabilities Act includes penalties, which create real pressure for compliance. Without such enforcement, he warned, students with disabilities and their families will never receive proper support.

Reasonable accommodation still out of reach: A blind spot in education

The recent Chiba case shed light on the challenges students with disabilities face during high school entrance exams. Nakagawa said he recently received a similar inquiry from Kanagawa Prefecture. A student with disabilities there lacked the “reasonable measures or adjustments” needed during the prefectural exam, he explained.

Nakagawa, along with other attorneys, the student’s parents, and other parents who related to and stood with them, are now questioning the board of education’s response.

He emphasized that such cases are not isolated. Many students with disabilities across Japan likely face similar issues right now.

Schools still fail to provide proper accommodations, he warned. Students who struggle to write or read exam questions need support. Tools like enlarged text, text-to-speech, or alternative input methods should be made available. Yet, in reality, schools often do not offer these supports.

Even when schools believe they’ve shown “consideration,” students are left thinking, “I wish they had provided this kind of support,” or “I wanted to use this device.” The attorney noted that iPads and similar tools are widely available today. Schools should embrace them. If the operation is difficult, a staff member could press buttons on behalf of the student.

Nakagawa stressed that true inclusion only happens when such accommodations become standard. They must be part of both daily learning and entrance exams.

Despite the Act for Eliminating Discrimination against Persons with Disabilities, many schools still act with a top-down mindset. They see themselves as authorities over students with disabilities, Attorney Nakagawa said.

The path to true inclusion

Students with disabilities still face unfair barriers in Japan’s schools. Laws exist, but many institutions treat accommodations as optional favors. Schools must recognize these supports as legal obligations, not acts of kindness. True change requires stronger laws with clear penalties.

Lawmakers must revise vague legal terms to emphasize duty over goodwill. Schools must also face real accountability. Without these reforms, legal protections will remain ineffective, and students with disabilities will continue to struggle for equal access.