In Japan, apologies are an integral part of life, so much so that there seems to be an art to them. In January, several apologies captured the public’s attention.

The first notable apology came from 日本航空 (nihon kōkū, Japan Airlines). A fatal plane collision on Jan. 2 shocked people not only in Japan but also around the world. The next day, we saw 謝罪する日本航空の幹部 (shazai suru nihon kōkū no kanbu, Japan Airlines executives give an apology), even though the cause of the accident was still unknown.

This column explored various apologetic expressions in June last year, with Yuko Tamura reviewing everything from すみません (sumimasen, I’m sorry/ excuse me) to 正式な謝罪 (seishikina shazai, formal apologies). Also, Rochelle Kopp looked at corporate Japan’s culture of 反省 (hansei, reflection) when it comes to apologizing properly in the office. With these in mind, let’s look at recent examples of both successful and unsuccessful public apologies.

On Jan. 12, 日本航空 made a public apology on its webpage:「1月2日に発生したJAL516便と海上保安庁機の衝突事故に伴い、皆さまにご心配とご迷惑をおかけいたしましたことを深くお詫び申し上げます」 (Ichi-gatsu futsuka ni hassei shita jaru go-ichi-roku-bin to kaijō hoanchō-ki no shōtotsu jiko ni tomonai, mina-sama ni go-shinpai to go meiwaku o o-kake itashimashita koto o fukaku o-wabi mōshiagemasu, We deeply apologize for the worries and inconveniences caused to everyone due to the collision incident on Jan. 2 between JAL Flight 516 and a coastal guard aircraft).

This apology has been rather well-received, largely because the evacuation of all passengers and crew from the 日本航空 aircraft was executed amazingly well, resulting in no casualties on the 日本航空 side.

Responses to the apology on the internet included comments such as, 「日本社会において、謝罪とは罪や過失を認めるためのものではなく、被害者や関係者へのシンパシーを示す趣旨であることが多い」 (Nihon shakai ni oite, shazai to wa tsumi ya kashitsu o mitomeru tame no mono dewa naku, higaisha ya kankeisha e no shinpashī o shimesu shushi de aru koto ga ōi, As for Japanese society, many apologies are, rather than admitting fault or liability, often intended to show sympathy toward the victims and stakeholders).

Note the use of 趣旨 (shushi), a JLPT N1-level vocabulary word that indicates the point of a statement, an objective or the gist: このプロジェクトの趣旨はなんですか (Kono purojekuto no shushi wa nan desu ka, What is the purpose of this event?).

Another example of a good apology came from a man identified as “16番” (jūroku-ban, No. 16), who failed the けん玉チャレンジ (kendama charenji, kendama challenge) during NHK’s “紅白歌合戦” (Kōhaku Uta Gassen, Red and White Song Contest) TV program.

The challenge in question involved 127 people performing a chain of けん玉 tricks in the hopes the group would achieve a Guinness world record. 16番 was unable to execute his part and, on Jan. 18, he appeared in the media saying, 「みなさんに謝りたいという気持ちが真っ先に出て、『すいませんでした』とその場でいきなり土下座しました」 (Mina-san ni ayamaritai to iu kimochi ga massaki ni dete, "suimasen deshita" to sono ba de ikinari dogeza shimashita, The first thought I had was to apologize to everyone, so I immediately knelt down and bowed deeply to apologize on the spot).

Due to his failure, Mr. 16 apologized in the deferential 土下座 (dogeza) position, in which you kneel on the ground and bow so that your head touches the floor in front of you. He did this in front of the more than 100 people involved in the event due to his failure. People online responded with comments such as, 「気の毒すぎる」 (Kinodoku sugiru, I feel so bad [for him]), 「落ち込まないで」 (Ochikomanaide, Don't get discouraged) and 「可哀想だろ」 (Kawaisō daro, Poor guy). Thus, with the proper apology, he was forgiven.

Not all apologies have been going well this year, including one by the CEO of LegoLand Japan.

The hashtag #レゴランド炎上 (regorando enjō, LegoLand debacle) went viral on Jan. 17 after a visitor complained on a now-deleted post on X (formerly Twitter) about her experience at the theme park in Nagoya — her family was mistakenly denied entry on their pass and made to wait in the cold before staff figured things out. レゴランド側の手違いによるトラブルでした (Regorando-gawa no techigai ni yoru toraburu deshita, The trouble was caused by a mistake on LegoLand’s side).

In response to the customer's post, CEO Yoshiyuki Honda immediately responded with 「この度は問題提起、ありがとうございます」 (Kono tabi wa mondai teiki, arigatō gozaimasu, Thank you very much for bringing up the issue). He then followed with an apology, 「また、この度皆様に不快な思いをさせてしまい、大変申し訳ありません」 (Mata, kono tabi mina-sama ni fukaina omoi o saseteshimai, taihen mōshiwake arimasen, Also, I deeply apologize for causing any trouble and negative feelings).

Was the apology sufficient? Apparently not. The CEO’s post was poorly received with some blaming his American education and experience working in Germany. 「一言目が『問題提起』→ まず『申し訳ありません』と謝罪する」(Hitokotome ga “mondai teiki” → mazu “mōshiwake arimasen” to shazai suru, The first word [should not be] “bringing up the issue,” first [it should be] “I deeply apologize”) was one response, 「上っ面だけの反省文」(Uwattsura dake no hansei-bun, A very superficial statement) was another.

Some people felt the 炎上 (enjō) — which means “up in flames” and is used to refer to internet controversies — was overblown: 「レゴランドの社長さんの謝罪文が燃えているらしいけど、私は読んでも正直何とも思わなかった。もう日本には住めないかもしれませんね」(‘Regorando no shachō-san no shazai-bun ga moete-iru rashii kedo, watashi wa yonde mo shōjiki nantomo omowanakatta. Mō Nihon niwa sumenai kamo shiremasen ne, It seems that the LegoLand CEO's apology has blown up but, honestly, I didn't find anything wrong with his statement. Perhaps I can no longer live in Japan) was one response, 「日本怖ーい」(Nihon kowāi, Japan scares me) was another. The interesting thing was that these responses were from Japanese people living overseas.

One reason a person in an official capacity overseas may be hesitant to offer an apology is, 謝罪は罪を認めた事になります (Shazai wa tsumi o mitometa koto ni narimasu, An apology is an admission of guilt).

On the other hand, there is no direct link between apology and legal liability in Japan. In an online statement from March 2022, Clair Law Firm explains that:

“Under the Japanese Civil Code, the legal effect of compensation for damages is established when all the ‘requirements’ of the article are met. And the ‘requirements’ do not include an apology. (However, if the apology includes a factual and concrete explanation of the default or intentional or negligent content, the claim may be granted by certifying the explained content.)”

だから、日本では謝罪しても法的責任は生じません (Dakara, Nihon de wa shazai shite mo hōteki sekinin wa shōjimasen, Therefore, in Japan, apologies do not create legal liablity).

Moreover, the firm mentions that there are cases in which victims 金銭での解決より真摯な謝罪を求める (kinsen de no kaiketsu yori shinshina shazai o motomeru, look for a sincere apology rather than asking for monetary compensation). So we can easily imagine that the party who receives a complaint first offers an apology followed by an explanation. まず謝罪しなければ、先に進みません (Mazu shazai shinakereba, sakini susumimasen, If you don’t apologize first, you cannot move forward).

日本とのビジネスでトラブルになったら、まず謝るのがいいかもしれません (Nihon to bijinesu de toraburu ni nattara, mazu ayamaru no ga ii kamo shiremasen, If you encounter a problem with a Japanese business partner, it might be better to apologize first). If you don’t apologize properly the first time, then you may find yourself caught in a loop of apologizing for your apology.