The Supreme Court will hear arguments in a case in which the issue of whether same-sex partners should be included in state benefits paid to the families of crime victims is due to be handed down on the 26th of this month. I did.
The judgments of the first and second instances, which deemed the case to be ``not applicable'' because the necessary arguments were held when changing the judgment, may be reconsidered.
Ten years ago, Yasuhide Uchiyama (49) of Nagoya City, whose male partner he lived with was murdered, applied to the Aichi Prefectural Public Safety Commission for government benefits intended for the families of crime victims. , was not recognized.
In the lawsuit that Mr. Uchiyama filed against the prefecture as a result of his complaint, the issue was whether same-sex partners were included in the ``people who were in a de facto marriage relationship'' eligible for benefits, and the first trial in Nagoya The district court and the second instance, the Nagoya High Court, dismissed the lawsuit as not falling within the scope of the case, and Mr. Uchiyama filed an appeal.
On the 5th, arguments were held in the 3rd Petty Bench of the Supreme Court, and Mr. Uchiyama's lawyer stated, ``There is no difference in the economic and psychological damage of losing a partner to a crime, whether of the opposite sex or the same sex, and same-sex people are excluded from the scope.'' "This is contrary to the purpose of the law," he said.
On the other hand, Aichi Prefecture stated, ``The eligibility of benefits should be considered based on the social situation, including national sentiment, and given the current social consciousness, it is difficult to think that common-law relationships between people of the same sex can be established.'' 'I objected.
The judgment will be handed down on the 26th of this month, and there is a possibility that the judgments of the first and second instances, which ruled that the case was not covered, may be reconsidered because the arguments necessary to change the judgment were held.