Hiroshima District Court dismisses second-generation A-bomb survivors’ claim for compensation, rules government measures not unconstitutional
Feb. 8, 2023
by Ryohei Katatsugu, Staff Writer
On February 7, the Hiroshima District Court dismissed a claim for damages in a lawsuit filed by 28 second-generation A-bomb survivors from Hiroshima and Yamaguchi prefectures whose parents experienced the atomic bombing of Hiroshima. The plaintiffs claimed it unconstitutional that the government is not providing second-generation A-bomb survivors with the same measures applied to the directly exposed A-bomb survivors. The district court ultimately ruled that the government’s handling of the issue was not unconstitutional.
In the first such judicial ruling in a similar lawsuit in December of last year, the Nagasaki District Court ruled that the government’s measures were not unconstitutional and rejected the demand for compensation of damages. The Hiroshima case marked successive court losses for second-generation A-bomb survivors. The plaintiffs criticized the Hiroshima court ruling, saying it failed to address the government’s handling of the issue. They indicated that an appeal to a higher court is being planned.
Regarding health damage caused by genetic effects of radiation, a major point of contention in the court case, presiding Judge Masato Morizane pointed out in his ruling, “Although the possibility of such effects has not been completely ruled out, it is not recognized as highly plausible,” he explained. Compared with the definition of A-bomb survivors as indicated in the Atomic Bomb Survivors Relief Law, “The accuracy of the scientific findings [about the genetic effects issue] is qualitatively very different,” said the ruling. It concluded that failure to adopt measures equivalent to those used in the case of A-bomb survivors did not constitute a violation of Japan’s Constitution.
In February 2017, the second-generation A-bomb survivors filed a lawsuit demanding consolation payments of 100,000 yen per person. The plaintiffs made the claim that they suffered from mental anguish, including anxiety about disease development due to the effects of their parents’ exposure to radiation from the atomic bombing. They also claimed that the act of seeking legal relief measures was guaranteed by the Constitution. The government, however, argued that genetic effects in second-generation A-bomb survivors have not been found in numerous studies conducted to date and demanded that the claims be dismissed.
The Health Service Bureau of Japan’s Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare commented about the Hiroshima court ruling, “Our assertion was accepted. We have been providing health examinations for second-generation A-bomb survivors, a project we will continue in the future.”
by Ryohei Katatsugu, Staff Writer
The Hiroshima District Court’s ruling rejected the claims of second-generation A-bomb survivors. The case decision was the result of the court’s strict interpretation that, at present, there is not sufficient scientific evidence that supports any health effects from radiation in the second-generation A-bomb survivors.
The plaintiffs emphasized that effects on humans cannot be ruled out, given that genetic effects have been observed in experiments involving other mammals such as mice. They based their arguments on the Hiroshima High Court ruling in a so-called “black rain” lawsuit, which ruled that if health effects of radiation cannot be denied, plaintiffs should be recognized as being A-bomb survivors.
The most recent district court ruling, however, pointed out that A-bomb survivors are “persons who may suffer health damage as a result of direct exposure to radiation from the atomic bombs,” and noted that the Atomic Bomb Survivors Relief Law defines A-bomb survivors based on certain scientific findings. The court’s ruling explained that research on genetic effects is still underway and that health effects in second-generation survivors “has neither been scientifically affirmed nor denied,” indicating there is a difference between that population and the directly exposed A-bomb survivors.
However, the court ruled that issues of relief and compensation will be “left to the discretion of the government,” meaning that relief could be provided depending on the judgment of the government. Estimates have put the number of second-generation A-bomb survivors in Japan at between 300,000 and 500,000 people and, like the A-bomb survivors themselves, the second-generation is aging. Their health concerns are also likely to continue increasing. The government must expedite its efforts to clarify the genetic effects from the atomic bombings and, at the same time, show its willingness to directly confront the suffering of second-generation survivors.
(Originally published on February 8, 2023)
On February 7, the Hiroshima District Court dismissed a claim for damages in a lawsuit filed by 28 second-generation A-bomb survivors from Hiroshima and Yamaguchi prefectures whose parents experienced the atomic bombing of Hiroshima. The plaintiffs claimed it unconstitutional that the government is not providing second-generation A-bomb survivors with the same measures applied to the directly exposed A-bomb survivors. The district court ultimately ruled that the government’s handling of the issue was not unconstitutional.
In the first such judicial ruling in a similar lawsuit in December of last year, the Nagasaki District Court ruled that the government’s measures were not unconstitutional and rejected the demand for compensation of damages. The Hiroshima case marked successive court losses for second-generation A-bomb survivors. The plaintiffs criticized the Hiroshima court ruling, saying it failed to address the government’s handling of the issue. They indicated that an appeal to a higher court is being planned.
Regarding health damage caused by genetic effects of radiation, a major point of contention in the court case, presiding Judge Masato Morizane pointed out in his ruling, “Although the possibility of such effects has not been completely ruled out, it is not recognized as highly plausible,” he explained. Compared with the definition of A-bomb survivors as indicated in the Atomic Bomb Survivors Relief Law, “The accuracy of the scientific findings [about the genetic effects issue] is qualitatively very different,” said the ruling. It concluded that failure to adopt measures equivalent to those used in the case of A-bomb survivors did not constitute a violation of Japan’s Constitution.
In February 2017, the second-generation A-bomb survivors filed a lawsuit demanding consolation payments of 100,000 yen per person. The plaintiffs made the claim that they suffered from mental anguish, including anxiety about disease development due to the effects of their parents’ exposure to radiation from the atomic bombing. They also claimed that the act of seeking legal relief measures was guaranteed by the Constitution. The government, however, argued that genetic effects in second-generation A-bomb survivors have not been found in numerous studies conducted to date and demanded that the claims be dismissed.
The Health Service Bureau of Japan’s Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare commented about the Hiroshima court ruling, “Our assertion was accepted. We have been providing health examinations for second-generation A-bomb survivors, a project we will continue in the future.”
Commentary: Ruling judges “scientific grounds” to be insufficient
by Ryohei Katatsugu, Staff Writer
The Hiroshima District Court’s ruling rejected the claims of second-generation A-bomb survivors. The case decision was the result of the court’s strict interpretation that, at present, there is not sufficient scientific evidence that supports any health effects from radiation in the second-generation A-bomb survivors.
The plaintiffs emphasized that effects on humans cannot be ruled out, given that genetic effects have been observed in experiments involving other mammals such as mice. They based their arguments on the Hiroshima High Court ruling in a so-called “black rain” lawsuit, which ruled that if health effects of radiation cannot be denied, plaintiffs should be recognized as being A-bomb survivors.
The most recent district court ruling, however, pointed out that A-bomb survivors are “persons who may suffer health damage as a result of direct exposure to radiation from the atomic bombs,” and noted that the Atomic Bomb Survivors Relief Law defines A-bomb survivors based on certain scientific findings. The court’s ruling explained that research on genetic effects is still underway and that health effects in second-generation survivors “has neither been scientifically affirmed nor denied,” indicating there is a difference between that population and the directly exposed A-bomb survivors.
However, the court ruled that issues of relief and compensation will be “left to the discretion of the government,” meaning that relief could be provided depending on the judgment of the government. Estimates have put the number of second-generation A-bomb survivors in Japan at between 300,000 and 500,000 people and, like the A-bomb survivors themselves, the second-generation is aging. Their health concerns are also likely to continue increasing. The government must expedite its efforts to clarify the genetic effects from the atomic bombings and, at the same time, show its willingness to directly confront the suffering of second-generation survivors.
(Originally published on February 8, 2023)
