The Tokyo District Court has handed down a ruling in a case brought by a 77-year-old man from Tokyo seeking 30 million yen in damages and other compensation for being forced to undergo sterilization surgery under the now-defunct Eugenic Protection Law, which was in force from 1948 to 1996.
In the ruling, presiding Judge Masaharu Ito said the surgery was illegal because it "violated the plaintiff's freedom protected by the Constitution." However, the court ruled the man had no right to claim compensation, citing the amount of time that had passed.
The man plans to appeal. A total of 24 people have filed similar lawsuits in eight district courts nationwide. This is the second ruling to be handed down, following one by the Sendai District Court in May last year, which also went against the victim.
According to the ruling, in 1957, when the man was 14 years old, he was taken to a hospital for the operation by an employee of a children's institute in Miyagi Prefecture where he was staying. As a result, he lost the ability to have children.
Under the old law, sterilization could be performed on people with hereditary mental illnesses or other issues, but the man had no such disease.
The court ruled that the operation was an illegal act, noting that "the ability to decide whether or not to have children was forcibly taken away."
The decision also acknowledged the unconstitutionality of the procedure, saying: "Deciding whether or not to have children is a freedom of private life that is protected by the Constitution. The operation violated the plaintiff's freedom."
The ruling said nothing about the constitutionality of the old law itself.
However, before an amended law came into force in April, the civil code stipulated that the right to claim compensation disappears 20 years after an illegal act.
The ruling stated that because more than 60 years had passed since the operation, the man's "right to claim compensation has already disappeared."
The plaintiff's side argued this time limit should not apply because of "the difficulty involved in filing a lawsuit amid discrimination and prejudice against people who underwent [sterilization] surgery."
However, the court rejected this argument, stating that a lawsuit could have been filed at the latest in 1996 when the old law was amended to recognize discrimination against people with disabilities.
Regarding the Diet's failure to enact a law providing compensation for so long, the ruling said it had not necessarily been clear there was a need to create a relief law.
Main points of ruling
The surgery was wrong and illegal. It was a violation of the "freedom to decide whether or not to have children" protected by the Constitution.
Because the time limit (20 years after the illegal act) has passed, the man no longer has a right to claim compensation.
Because the need for a relief law was not clear, the court did not recognize the state or Diet had acted illegally.
Read more from The Japan News at https://japannews.yomiuri.co.jp/
