The 15 judges listened to testimony for three hours in five cases and four rulings issued by lower courts. The dispute concerns the statute of limitations for filing a claim for damages. The decision is expected before the summer.
Tokyo () – “It should have been me who decided if I would be happy or not […]. She wanted to decide what kind of life she would lead. I feel very frustrated for not having been able to do it,” Kikuo Kojima, 83, who was only 19 at the time of the events and today is one of the victims of “forced sterilization” said yesterday before the judges of the Supreme Court. A civil party has been formed in the case against the government, as reported by the Japanese newspaper. Asahi Shimbunlistened to him and the other plaintiffs who decided to present an appeal before the Court against the infamous eugenics law that was in force between 1948 and 1996. The 15 members attended three hours of testimony in the scope of five cases and four sentences handed down by lower courts on which they will have to issue a verdict before the summer.
About 25,000 people with disabilities or chronic illnesses were sterilized in Japan between 1948 and 1996 under a eugenics law. At least 16,000 cases were carried out without consent, even in minors, including two nine-year-old children, a boy and a girl. The data revealing the widespread use of this practice in the past is contained in a 1,400-page report that was published in June last year and presented in Parliament, which has sparked controversy and discussion.
The study shows that sterilization was a necessary condition for admission to care centers or for marriage and was performed through radiation or removal of the uterus, with the majority of victims being women. It applied to people with disabilities, mental illnesses or hereditary disorders, and was introduced after World War II to address food shortages in the country. Later, as stated in physical education books from the ’70s, this practice was used as a method to “improve the genetic predisposition of the entire population.”
The two main points of controversy are the unconstitutionality of the old rule and the application of a 20-year statute of limitations to deny compensation to plaintiffs. The five high courts that must hear cases brought by sterilization victims have declared the old law unconstitutional; However, there have been differences of opinion over the statute of limitations, and the Sendai High Court denied compensation because the deadline to appeal would have expired, although the other Courts have ordered the government to compensate the victims. That is why we have turned to the Supreme Court, which must rule on the statute of limitations before the summer, to create a univocal regulatory framework.
One of the plaintiffs is a couple who, using the pseudonyms Taro and Hanako Nomura, filed a lawsuit with the Osaka High Court; In a ruling considered historic, he ordered the government to pay compensation. The couple said that they married in 1970 and Hanako became pregnant; She was sterilized without consent after a cesarean section and the baby died shortly after giving birth. Another plaintiff before the Tokyo High Court, 81 years old and identified by the pseudonym Saburo Kita, spoke of a “disrupted” life due to the operation, after which “I have suffered for 67 years.” The man was sterilized without his knowledge when he was 14, but never told his wife until shortly before his death. A 70-year-old woman with an open case in Sendai said she had decided to file a complaint because she “did not want the damage that was caused to be covered up, even though the government has repeatedly said that she will not apologize or investigate.”
Add Comment