中國船王后人圍繞日本賠款爆發內鬥
A landmark war reparations ruling that forced Japan’s Mitsui OSK to pay millions of dollars to the descendants of a Chinese shipping tycoon has been stymied by that most prosaic of reasons: family squabbling over how to split the spoils.
2014年一項具有劃時代意義的戰爭賠償判決，迫使商船三井(Mitsui OSK)向一名中國船王的後人支付數千萬美元。但這項判決至今卻仍未能執行，就因爲一個最平常的原因：圍繞如何分割這筆賠償產生的家族爭鬥。
The row broke out after a 70 year battle pursued through the courts of Tokyo and Shanghai ended with the award of ￥4bn compensation to the descendants of Chinese shipping tycoon Chen Shuntong, whose ships had been commandeered by the Japanese navy and lost during the war.
這場官司在東京、上海兩地的法院打了70年，最後以中國船王陳順通的後代獲得40億日元賠償告終，沒想到家族糾紛卻隨之而來。二戰期間，陳順通的船被日本帝國海軍徵用後全部損失。
But rather than bring cheer, the victory has sown discord among the growing ranks of descendants and creditors. Those suing for a share of the spoils included a creditor claiming to be owed money by Chen’s grandson — in a case since rebuffed — and another claiming to be an illegitimate grandson.
訴訟勝利並沒有帶來歡呼，反而在越來越多的陳氏後人及債權人中間播下了爭執的種子。要求分割賠償的起訴者包括一名債權人，此人聲稱陳順通的孫子欠自己錢——此案已被駁回——另一人則聲稱自己是陳順通的非婚生孫子。
Meanwhile the branch of the family that remained in mainland China is threatening to challenge Chen’s decades-old will that handed any proceeds from the case to the descendants of the eldest son, who reside in Hong Kong. They argue it violates mainland law on equal division of property to women.
同時，留在中國內地的陳氏家族分支威脅要質疑陳順通幾十年前留下的遺囑。根據這份遺囑，本案所有賠款均交由陳順通長子的定居香港的後人。內地陳氏後人認爲，這違反了女性後代平等分配財產的內地法律。
“We respect the legal process,” David Chen, the tycoon’s great-grandson, said. “We were the plaintiffs, now we are the defendants. After we won the case we proceeded according to the law but these other people have presented themselves.”
陳順通曾孫陳中威(David Chen)說：“我們尊重法律程序。我們之前是原告，現在成了被告。我們贏了這件案子後，我們依法走程序，但這些人出現了。”
The will survived a challenge in Shanghai 20 years ago, but the mainland family branch is now seeking to reintroduce the case as an issue of inheritance law.
20年前在上海，陳順通的遺囑曾成功頂住質疑，但內地的陳氏家族分支正爭取依據中國《繼承法》重啓本案。
“I think it’s a very interesting legal question,” said their lawyer, Jiang Xian of Shanghai United Law Firm, referring to which law should be applied: that of the pre-1949 Republic of China or the current People’s Republic of China which requires family property to be divided equally among male and female survivors.
內地陳氏後人代理律師、上海市聯合律師事務所的江憲在談及應適用什麼法律時表示：“我認爲這是一個非常有意思的法律問題。”是應該適用1949年以前的中華民國法律，還是現行的中華人民共和國法律？如果依照後者，家產應平等分配給男女繼承人。
“China’s strengthening is the reason that there was finally compensation for my father’s ships leased to the Japanese,” said Chen Gankang, the tycoon’s younger son, who grew up in Shanghai. “I have confidence that the stronger legal system now will also mean the results can be equally divided.”
陳順通的小兒子陳乾康從小在上海長大，他說：“因爲中國強大了，我父親租給日本人的船才最終獲得賠償。我相信現在更強大的法律體系也意味着，賠償可以被平等分配。”
China, South Korea and other governments waived reparations in return for Japanese aid when they normalised relations after the war. Individuals seeking compensation for personal abuse suffered at the hands of invading Japanese armies have had very little success in Asian courts. The Chen case is an exception, because it is technically a commercial dispute over the terms of a 1930s lease.
二戰結束後，中國等國家在與日本實現邦交正常化時，放棄了賠償以換取日方的援助。在亞洲各國法院，遭遇入侵日軍人身虐待的個人尋求賠償時，幾乎沒有成功的先例。陳家的案子是個例外，因爲在技術層面上，這是圍繞20世紀30年代租船合同的條款發生的一起商業糾紛。
Activists and lawyers seeking reparations from Japanese companies for other Chinese citizens said the fight over the Chen money was as unusual as Chung Wei Steamship Co’s original claim. The amounts sought in other claims are much smaller, they said, and the elderly plaintiffs have far fewer descendants.
一些幫助其他中國公民尋求日本企業賠償的活動人士和律師表示，陳家後人的賠償爭奪戰與中威輪船公司(Chung Wei Steamship)最初的索賠一樣不尋常。他們表示，其他索賠案件要求的金額要少得多，而且那些年長的原告們也沒有這麼多後代。
Tong Zeng, a rights activist who electrified China when he first proposed individual reparations in the early 1990s and advised the Chen family in its complaint against Mitsui OSK, called the dispute “regrettable”.
維權人士童增在20世紀90年代初首次提議由個人爭取索賠，當時在中國引起轟動，他還曾在陳家訴商船三井案中提供建議。他表示，陳家的這場糾紛“令人遺憾”。
“I’m happy to help with lawsuits against the Japanese,” he said. “But I can’t help them settle the problem of how to divide it.”
童增說：“我很高興能在對日訴訟案件中起到幫助作用。但我無法幫助他們解決賠償分割問題。”
