Kyoto Asahigaoka Junior High School Affair (京都旭丘中学事件)
The Kyoto Asahigaoka Junior High School affair is a conflict that lasted from April 29, 1953 to June 1, 1954, between conservative and progressive parents/teachers over the education policy of Kyoto Municipal Asahigaoka Junior High school. Since the Ministry of Education and Kyoto City took sides with the conservatives while the Japan Teachers Union did with the progressives, the conflict became serious.
Through the school's PTA, the conservative parents and progressive parents had already had friction over 'Peace Education' by some teachers, making an issue whether it was 'Ideologically Prejudiced Education' or not. However, the conflict intensified because on December 5, 1953, the conservative parents blamed 'Ideologically Prejudiced Education' by progressive teachers regarding an accidental fire occurred in the school on April 29 of the same year and its reconstruction plan. In March of the next year, the Kyoto City Board of Education tried to stabilize the situation by transferring three teachers, who were accused by the conservatives. Against this decision, the three teachers refused the transfer, so the Board decided to give them disciplinary dismissal.
Against this action, the progressive teachers/parents and the Kyoto teachers' union blocked up the school to give custody classes while the conservatives parents and the Kyoto City Board of Education against the progressives gave supplementary classes in the public institution, dividing students into two sides. Furthermore, Yoshizo TAKAYAMA, the mayor of Kyoto City, and Shigeo ODACHI, the Minister of Education condemned the blockage of the school as a 'Violent revolution' and required the early establishment of the 'Two Education Laws' that made the situation more confused. With the prolonged situation, both sides were subjected to criticism that they took advantage of children during the conflict. According to the arbitration by the Kyoto Prefecture Board of Education, with the condition that all teachers except the three teachers given disciplinary dismissal were not punished, but transferred to other schools and to replace all the teachers including the principal, the both sides compromised and the school reopened on June 6. The three teachers who were given disciplinary dismissal filed suit to nullify the action, but in 1974 the plaintiffs lost the case in the Supreme Court.