Judgment over infertility surgery under the old eugenics protection law today Tokyo District Court June 30, 4:07
A ruling in a court case in which a man in his 70s sued the country for being forced to undergo sterilization under the old eugenics protection law was handed down in the Tokyo District Court on the 30th. This is the second of the trials that have been filed nationwide, and attention will be paid to whether the former eugenics protection law violated the Constitution and what judgment was made regarding the state's liability, including compensation.
A 77-year-old man in Tokyo who complains about the damage under the name of Kitasaburo said that it was a violation of the constitution due to a serious human rights violation that forced sterilization under the old eugenics protection law at the age of 14 in 1957. Is seeking compensation.
In the trial, the big issue was whether the period called "disqualification period", when the 20 years passed from the tort, the compensation was not sought.
The male side argued that the disqualification period should not be applied due to ongoing psychological distress, while the national side dismissed the complaint because it no longer had the right to claim compensation 20 years after the operation. Insisted.
By 1996, when the old eugenics protection law was abolished, approximately 25,000 people were said to have undergone sterilization surgery, including cases in which the person consented, due to disability.
Nine similar cases have been filed nationwide, of which the Sendai District Court issued a verdict last May in which it found a constitutional violation but dismissed an action seeking compensation.
This is the second case after the Tokyo District Court's decision, and it will be noted whether the sterilization operation under the old eugenic protection law violated the constitution and what kind of judgment the court will make regarding the state's liability including compensation. ..
The ruling will be handed down at 2:00 pm on the 30th.
The biggest issue is the “rejection period”
The biggest issue in this case was whether to apply a rule called a “rejection period” that sets a deadline for not being able to seek compensation.
The rule of exclusion period of the old civil law stipulates that compensation will not be sought 20 years after the tort.
At the trial, the male defense team was deprived of the "right to decide whether to give birth or raise a child" by sterilization surgery, and suffered from the fact that he could not have a child with his wife in the subsequent life, and had surgery. He argued that the facts put him at risk of various discrimination.
He also argues that the mental distress of national torrent sterilization is a continuing "life harm" and that disqualification periods should not apply.
On the other hand, the nation claims that illegal activities occurred only during sterilization surgery in 1957, and all subsequent damage was due to sterilization surgery. He claims that he should dismiss the complaint, saying that the disqualification period began when he had undergone sterilization, and that he had no rights to claim compensation for more than 20 years.
The application of the dismissal period has been the reason for dismissing claims for compensation in many cases and has become a high barrier for plaintiffs to claim damages.
In the 1940s, in a trial over food pollution "Kanemi Yusho" that occurred in western Japan in succession, people who were certified as patients more than 20 years after the outbreak filed a lawsuit against the manufacturing company, and the Supreme Court was fought. , A ruling has been finalized to dismiss the complaint as the disqualification period has expired.
On the other hand, there are exceptional cases in which compensation was granted without applying the exclusion period.
About 26 years after a woman was murdered and the body was buried in the ground, the bereaved family asked the assailant to compensate for damages.・It was against the idea of fairness.” Even after 20 years from the damage, the exclusion period was not applied.
In this trial as well, in response to these past cases, male defense and national sides fought over the application of the exclusion period.
Comments before plaintiff's man ruling
A 77-year-old man sue in the name of Kitasaburo made a comment through a defense team before the ruling.
Mr. Kita said, “I don't think it should be an unjust judgment similar to the Sendai District Court, but I'm worried. I want the court to recognize that the former eugenics protection law was the wrong law. I have suffered for over 60 years. I want you to put it back in. I want you to pass that thought on to the court. I want the country to apologize for anything after the ruling. I don't want to take this wound to the graveyard. I want a fair trial."
Thoughts on the plaintiff's man's decision
In 1957, Kita Saburo was taken to a welfare facility in Miyagi prefecture for the reason of delinquency, and when he was 14 years old, he was taken to a hospital without being informed by the staff of the facility and had a sterilization operation. Says.
Afterwards, Kita-san was told by a senior at the institution that he had an sterilization operation, and he could not tell about the operation.
Married at the age of 29. My wife, who did not know the circumstances, said that she was worried because she could not have children, but she still could not tell the facts.
It was about 40 years after I got married. It was just before my wife died.
The wife, who was informed of the facts, died, without worrying about Kita-san, while caring for Kita-san's body, saying "I will eat the solder properly".
Five years after my wife died, I heard that people who had surgery started to speak out and that there was a move to appeal to the country.
Then, at a medical institution, he confirmed that his body had a mark that seemed to be surgical, and filed a trial.
In May last year, the first sentence of a series of trials was handed down by the Sendai District Court.
It was admitted that the old eugenics protection law was against the constitution, but the claim to the state was rejected.
One of the reasons is the "rejection period".
Twenty years have passed since the plaintiffs underwent surgery and their right to seek compensation has disappeared.
Mr. Kita felt a strong doubt about this decision.
It is difficult for the person who underwent the surgery to speak out, and at that time it was impossible to bring a case.
Mr. Kita said, "I myself could not tell anyone that I had surgery, and I could not openly open the case to the case. Although the country continued to leave the problem, the liability was acknowledged. It's funny that you can't do that."
In April last year, the government established a system to pay a lump sum of 3.2 million yen to those who have undergone sterilization surgery.
However, in order to clarify the responsibility of the country, Mr. Kita continued the trial without applying for a lump sum payment.
I also became the co-representative of the group that was operated on by the person who had the surgery and his family, and visited the trials and meetings held in various places to appeal the actual situation of forced surgery.
On the 30th, Mr. Kita will decide to put a handmade paper flower on his chest that says "Justice and a fair trial."
Mr. Kita said, “I have lived with suffering and sadness for more than 60 years since I had undergone sterilization surgery. I am 77 years old and my life is getting shorter, so I want to acknowledge the responsibility of the country.” I will.