The State of Emergency and Its Impact on the Sex Industry
On April 7, 2020, then–Prime Minister Abe declared a state of emergency for seven prefectures under the Act on Special Measures for Pandemic Influenza and New Infectious Diseases. In response, Tokyo issued closure requests starting the next day, April 8, to a wide range of businesses, including sex establishments. Although there was no penalty for noncompliance, social pressure forced many establishments to close or scale back.
The Exclusion-from-Compensation Problem
The issue became eligibility for cooperation payments. Tokyo announced it would pay small and medium-sized businesses and sole proprietors that complied with the closure requests an infection-prevention cooperation payment of 500,000 to 1 million yen, but sex-related special businesses (Article 2, Paragraphs 6 through 13 of the Businesses Affecting Public Morals Regulation Act, fuei-ho) were explicitly excluded.
A metropolitan government official explained that "from the standpoint of public order and morals, it is not appropriate to include them as eligible recipients," but industry groups pushed back strongly, arguing that "having to comply with closure requests while receiving no compensation violates equality under the law."
Conditions on the Ground and Operators' Voices
One sex-business operator told reporters: "I closed because I want to protect my employees, but rent and fixed costs keep going out. If I can't use subsidies or loans, my only option is to go out of business." Women working as service providers likewise faced a rash of cases of financial hardship as their income suddenly dropped to zero.
An NPO that supports sex-industry workers also issued a statement: "There are people slipping through the safety net. Support should not be refused simply because someone works in the sex industry."
Legal and Constitutional Issues
Among legal scholars, debate also arose over the constitutionality of uncompensated closure requests. The situation—where there is supposedly a "freedom not to comply" with a closure request, yet that request carries de facto compulsion with no compensation—was described by some as "close to an infringement of property rights."
Legal scholars also raised repeated questions about whether there was "a rational basis" for excluding only the sex industry from compensation.
What Comes Next
The state of emergency was expected to be extended through the end of May, raising the possibility of an even more prolonged blow to the industry. Talks between the authorities and industry groups were called for, but no concrete solution was in sight.
This article was compiled based on publicly available information and interviews with industry sources.