Constitutionality of Article 3, Paragraph 1 of the Nationality Law and Judicial Remedies −Judgment rendered by the Grand Bench of the Supreme Court on June 4, 2008−

2008（平成20）年6月4日、最高裁判所大法廷は、日本人父と外国人母との間に出生した後に父から認知された非嫡出子について、父母の婚姻により嫡出子たる身分を取得した（準正があった）場合に限り届出による日本国籍の取得を認めている国籍法3条1項（2008年12月改正前）が憲法14条1項に違反するとし、準正要件を除く国籍法3条1項所定の要件を満たす上告人（原告）に日本国籍の取得を認める２つの判決を下した。この判決は、最高裁による8例目の法令違憲判決であることだけでなく、権利救済方法の点でも注目される。本稿では、国籍法制の沿革、学説の状況と下級審の判断の流れを概観した上で、違憲審査基準、国籍法3条1項の立法目的、立法目的と手段との合理的関連性、司法的救済の可否などの論点について最高裁の判断の検討を行った。最後に、改正された国籍法の問題点と今後の課題にも言及した。On June 4, 2008, the Grand Bench of the Supreme Court of Japan ruled that Article 3, paragraph 1 of the Nationality Law （before amendment in December, 2008） allowing an illegitimate child who was born to a Japanese father and a non-Japanese mother and is acknowledged by his/her father after his/her birth to acquire Japanese nationality through a notification only when he/she has obtained status as a legitimate child as a result of the marriage of his/her parents （when legitimation has occurred） violated Article 14, paragraph 1 of the Japanese Constitution, and that Japanese nationality should be granted to the appellants （plaintiffs） who have satisfied the requirements apart from the legitimation requirement prescribed in Article 3, paragraph 1 of the Nationality Law. This judgment is worthy of attention in two aspects, namely: that it was the eighth case in the history of Japanese judicial review where the Supreme Court declared the relevant provision unconstitutional; and that the Supreme Court expressed a certain view determining that judicial remedies can be given. This paper overviews the history of the Nationality Law, theoretical situations and a series of judicial precedents, and then reviews the judgment rendered by the Supreme Court on the basis of judicial review criteria, the legislative purpose of Article 3, paragraph 1 of the Nationality Law, reasonable relevance between legislative purpose and the measure, applicability and inapplicability of judicial remedies. Finally, this paper also refers to the problems and future issues regarding the amended Nationality Law