A man in Gifu Prefecture who lost his job as a security guard at a time when the law stipulated a "disqualification clause" that restricted the occupations of those who used the adult guardianship system. Following the first trial, the High Court upheld the man's appeal, and ordered the government to pay 500,000 yen in compensation, stating that the provisions at the time were unconstitutional.
A man in his 30s from Gifu Prefecture with mild intellectual disability began using the adult guardianship system five years ago when he was working as a security guard. He sued the government for damages of 1 million yen, claiming that he was forced to retire due to the ``disqualification clause'' that prohibits users from engaging in security work.
The Gifu District Court in the first trial judged that the provisions of the former law violated the Constitution, which guaranteed freedom of occupation, etc., and ordered the government to pay 100,000 yen, but both the government and the plaintiff side I was appealing.
In the second trial on the 15th, presiding judge Yasuhiro Hasegawa of the Nagoya High Court accepted the man's appeal following the first trial, stating, "It violates the constitution that guarantees equality under the law and freedom to choose one's job. , There is a causal relationship between the fact that the provision was not revised and the man was forced to retire."
On top of that, it said, ``It restricts the freedom to choose a job itself, and is forcibly deprived of important opportunities for self-fulfillment, and the first trial's alimony is not appropriate for the man's mental pain.'' The country was ordered to pay 500,000 yen in compensation, which is more than the first trial.
``Disqualification clauses'' were stipulated in 187 laws, including the Security Business Law, the National Public Service Law, and the Self-Defense Forces Law, but due to growing calls for a review, they have been removed from all laws.