A situation in which relief is provided to some bereaved relatives of hibakusha, victims of the 1945 atomic bombings, who are living overseas and not to others -- this could never be described as desirable.
About 150 family members of 31 South Koreans who survived the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki had filed a class-action lawsuit demanding the Japanese government pay damages. The Osaka District Court has handed down a ruling dismissing their claim.
In 2003, the former Welfare Ministry's notification that hibakusha who left Japan would lose this status was abolished. Until then, overseas hibakusha had been unable to receive benefits for medical care and other treatment based on the Atomic Bomb Survivors' Assistance Law. The bereaved families claimed it was illegal for these survivors to be exempted from receiving this relief.
The court ruling deemed that the statute of limitations under the Civil Code applies in this case. Under this rule, the right to claim damages lapses 20 years after an illegal act has been committed.
The illegal act of excluding overseas hibakusha from being covered by the assistance law ended when these survivors died. As the date of their deaths is taken as the starting point, the bereaved families that filed lawsuits after 20 years had passed have no right to claim damages.
The central government's assertion along these lines is, legally speaking, reasonable. It should surprise no one that the court's ruling accepted this.
Restrictions on applying a statute of limitations are limited to instances that are significantly contrary to justice and fairness.
On this point, the court ruling attached importance to the fact that other lawsuits challenging the legality of the ministry's notification had been lodged quickly. It is difficult to criticize as illogical the ruling's conclusion that "it was possible to file lawsuits before 20 years had passed."
Consider broader relief
However, the upshot is that this ruling will undoubtedly create unfairness between the bereaved families of overseas hibakusha.
After the Supreme Court's 2007 decision that the ministry's notification was illegal, the government indicated that it planned to, in principle, seek a settlement if hibakusha or their bereaved families filed lawsuits.
The government has already reached settlements with 175 family members of hibakusha who died more than 20 years ago, and paid them compensation. This latest case also similarly should have concluded with a settlement.
The government has, since autumn 2016, started claiming the statute of limitations should be applied. During the court case, it is said that the government explained that it had been "slow to notice" this point.
There are doubts about whether this was an appropriate response for the government to take. It is little wonder that the bereaved families feel dissatisfied with the government's explanation. It is clear the government's inconsistent plan has amplified confusion on this issue.
There are a total of about 600 bereaved family members who are plaintiffs in cases filed at the Osaka, Hiroshima and Nagasaki district courts in which the statute of limitations is a point in dispute. Given that the government will contest these cases, there is a limit to pursuing a judicial solution for this matter. After the latest ruling, lawyers for the plaintiffs indicated they would "carefully consider whether to appeal the ruling."
Solutions that uphold the spirit of the assistance law providing broad relief to hibakusha should be discussed in the Diet and elsewhere.
(From The Yomiuri Shimbun, Feb. 1, 2018)
Read more from The Japan News at https://japannews.yomiuri.co.jp/
