December 15, 2009
The Tokyo District Court on December 14 rejected a claim for state apologies and compensation filed by 131 victims and bereaved families of the massive Tokyo air raids by U.S. forces during WWII.
A plaintiffs’ legal team stated that they will appeal the decision at a higher court.
At issue in this lawsuit is whether the argument that all people ought to accept the damages caused by the war as the Supreme Court stated in its ruling in 1968 can be overturned.
In light of the constitutional principles of pacifism and respect for basic human rights, the plaintiffs insist that excluding air-raid victims from the country’s war relief recipient list is in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution which guarantees equality under the law.
The judge said that the sentiment of the plaintiffs is “understandable” and that like military related-personnel, they also deserve to receive relief. However, he ruled that difference in relief measures between civilians and military-related personnel is “not a clear case of discrimination,” stating, “Almost all Japanese people at that time suffered some sort of damage by the war.”
This judgment is in effect based on the logic of the previous ruling and abandons judicial obligation to respect the human rights of each individual.
At a news conference held after the ruling, head of the legal team Nakayama Taketoshi criticized it for accepting the logic of discrimination and abandoning responsibilities for justice. The leader of the plaintiffs’ group said, “We will continue fighting in court until civilians and not just military personnel receive relief.”
- Akahata, December 15, 2009
At issue in this lawsuit is whether the argument that all people ought to accept the damages caused by the war as the Supreme Court stated in its ruling in 1968 can be overturned.
In light of the constitutional principles of pacifism and respect for basic human rights, the plaintiffs insist that excluding air-raid victims from the country’s war relief recipient list is in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution which guarantees equality under the law.
The judge said that the sentiment of the plaintiffs is “understandable” and that like military related-personnel, they also deserve to receive relief. However, he ruled that difference in relief measures between civilians and military-related personnel is “not a clear case of discrimination,” stating, “Almost all Japanese people at that time suffered some sort of damage by the war.”
This judgment is in effect based on the logic of the previous ruling and abandons judicial obligation to respect the human rights of each individual.
At a news conference held after the ruling, head of the legal team Nakayama Taketoshi criticized it for accepting the logic of discrimination and abandoning responsibilities for justice. The leader of the plaintiffs’ group said, “We will continue fighting in court until civilians and not just military personnel receive relief.”
- Akahata, December 15, 2009
