TOKYO, Oct. 11 (Xinhua) -- "The interests of the United States are being placed above the human rights of Japanese people and Japan's national sovereignty."
Hiroyuki Oba, a reporter with Japan's Mainichi Shimbun newspaper, made the remark in an interview with Xinhua in Tokyo on Saturday, following the release of a documentary examining low-altitude flights by U.S. military helicopters over central Tokyo.
Titled "300 Meters Above Tokyo," the documentary takes its name from a Japanese aviation safety rule that generally requires aircraft to maintain a vertical distance of at least 300 meters from the highest obstacle in densely populated areas. Yet a special law enacted in connection with the Japan-U.S. Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) exempts U.S. military aircraft from this restriction.
The film goes beyond the skies over Tokyo, examining alleged crimes involving U.S. military personnel, victims' struggles for justice and the Japanese government's response.
Why are different rules applied under the same sky? The question sparked heated discussion at a post-screening event on Saturday, raising a broader issue: Whom is the Japanese government protecting?
LEGAL PRIVILEGES, LIMITED ACCOUNTABILITY
Signed by Japan and the United States in 1960, SOFA governs the legal status of U.S. forces stationed in Japan. Under the agreement, the United States has the primary right to exercise jurisdiction over offenses committed by U.S. service members in the performance of official duty, while Japan generally has the primary right to exercise jurisdiction over offenses committed outside official duty.
However, when a suspect is in U.S. custody, U.S. authorities generally retain custody until Japanese authorities formally bring charges, under the agreement's provisions on custody and the transfer of suspects.
In practice, the arrangement can complicate Japanese investigations and delay the transfer of suspects to Japanese custody. Critics argue that the special treatment afforded to U.S. personnel weakens accountability and makes it more difficult for Japanese authorities to investigate alleged crimes.
At the post-screening discussion, Oba said Japanese police could request to question suspects but faced limitations if they could not maintain continuous control over their whereabouts.
Each interrogation requires coordination, and the time available is limited, Oba said. Meanwhile, it is difficult for the public to know how suspects are managed or treated inside U.S. military bases.
These constraints have repeatedly fueled frustration among victims and local residents, particularly in Okinawa Prefecture, which hosts a large concentration of U.S. military facilities in Japan.
On Oct. 3, a 39-year-old Japanese woman was found dead at a hotel in Naha, Okinawa. A 20-year-old U.S. Marine stationed at Marine Corps Air Station Futenma, identified as Devin Jacob Ballard, was arrested by Okinawa police the following day on suspicion of murdering the woman and stealing her wallet and other belongings. Ballard has denied the allegations.
The incident prompted the Okinawa prefectural government to protest and call for effective measures to prevent similar crimes, as well as a fundamental review of SOFA.
At the central government level, however, Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi and other officials have confined their public responses to expressing regret, lodging protests and demanding full cooperation with the investigation and measures to prevent a recurrence. They have not raised the prospect of revising SOFA in their public statements.
According to Okinawa Prefecture statistics, more than 6,400 criminal cases involving U.S. service members and military-affiliated personnel were recorded between 1972 and 2025. The prefecture has also reported an upward trend in cases involving U.S. military personnel in recent years.
Over the decades, several cases have left a lasting impact on Japanese society.
In 1995, three U.S. servicemen stationed in Okinawa abducted and raped a 12-year-old girl, triggering widespread public outrage. In 2016, a military-affiliated individual killed a 20-year-old Okinawan woman and dumped her body. In 2023, a U.S. service member stationed in Okinawa abducted and sexually assaulted a girl under the age of 16.
"I am really angry because these incidents have never stopped," Ai Takahashi, a woman who attended the screening, told Xinhua.
Takahashi said she had recently joined a protest outside the U.S. Embassy in Japan over the death of the Okinawan woman. While demonstrators gathered outside, music from a party being held inside the embassy could be heard, she said.
"The stark contrast was really painful to see," she said.
QUESTIONS OVER TRANSPARENCY
Another chapter of the documentary, titled "Who Lets the Perpetrators Escape?" examines a further source of public distrust: cases in which the Japanese government did not promptly disclose serious alleged crimes involving U.S. military personnel, leaving the public to learn of the incidents only through media reports.
"Choosing to cover things up despite all these problems is itself a problem," a man in his 60s told Xinhua at the discussion.
The issue, the film suggests, extends beyond the handling of individual criminal cases to broader questions of transparency and accountability in the relationship between the two countries.
Oba also recalled the difficulties he encountered while investigating noise pollution around U.S. military helicopter facilities. Finding Japanese residents willing to speak publicly about the issue was surprisingly difficult, he said.
Even residents who strongly opposed the flights were often reluctant to be interviewed. Some feared that publicly criticizing the U.S. military could expose them to scrutiny, while others worried that doing so might affect their children's future employment prospects.
More than 80 years after the end of World War II, the privileges enjoyed by U.S. forces stationed in Japan continue to affect the lives of local communities. For those seeking changes to the existing arrangements, the documentary's central question remains unresolved: When the interests of the alliance appear to conflict with the rights of Japanese citizens, whose interests will the government put first?
As the film and the voices surrounding it suggest, changing the status quo may still be a long road ahead. ■
