![]() Ministry officials noted, for example, that the court recognized plaintiffs as suffering from Minamata disease even if the concentration of methylmercury in their hair is below World Health Organization guidelines. 27 ruling “significantly deviates from international scientific knowledge as well as (past) rulings finalized by the Supreme Court.” 4.Īn Environment Ministry official said the Osaka District Court ’s Sept. Chisso Corp., the chemical manufacturer responsible for causing mercury poisoning by discharging industrial wastewater into Minamata Bay in the prefecture, filed its appeal Oct. The appeals were filed separately with the court on Oct. The government should move immediately to expand relief for sufferers rather than just wait for all judicial decisions to be delivered.OSAKA-The central government and Kumamoto Prefecture both appealed an Osaka District Court ruling that expanded the definition of Minamata disease victims beyond the state ’s standards and ordered compensation to be paid to plaintiffs. ![]() ![]() The government bears a heavy responsibility for having stuck to its strict criteria for recognizing sufferers.įurthermore, no path has been paved to implement the medical checkups for residents in affected areas as stipulated under the special measures law, with only a research team to consider how to do this having been set up. as the source.Īfter two political decisions, the scope of relief has been expanded, but class-action lawsuits over Minamata disease and Niigata Minamata disease, two of Japan's four big pollution diseases, are ongoing, and resolution of the cases appears to be a long way off. In 1968 the government identified a methylmercury compound in wastewater released by Chisso Corp. Minamata disease was officially recognized in 1956. This is an appropriate decision based on the actual state of damage. While the government claimed that the 20-year statute of limitations for compensation claims had expired, the court dismissed this, saying there were cases in which symptoms developed long afterward. The court additionally pointed out that contaminated fish and shellfish could have been in circulation until later years, and criticized the government for limiting payment to people based on their time of birth and the periods they lived in certain areas. It also took into account the fishing operations and distribution of seafood at the time of the pollution. ![]() Furthermore, the deadline for applications was set at three years from the time the law came into effect, so people who developed symptoms after that were not eligible for compensation.īased on surveys of mercury found in people's hair and other data, the court accepted the possibility that Minamata disease could occur in areas outside those defined by the government standards. As a result, of the approximately 48,000 people who applied for compensation, some 9,700 were turned away. If people were living outside those areas, they had to provide proof that they had eaten contaminated seafood. However, it restricted the scope of eligibility, in principle, to nine municipalities in Kumamoto and Kagoshima prefectures close to Minamata Bay and the surrounding waters. $14,000) each, even if they had not been diagnosed with Minamata disease. The government had decided to provide relief to victims under the special measures law, paying those with sensory ailments such as numbness in their limbs a lump sum of 2.1 million yen (approx. The Osaka court ruling, which recognized all of the plaintiffs as victims, was a landmark decision and officials must take it seriously. The plaintiffs residing in western Japan's Kinki region, including former residents of the southwestern Japan prefecture of Kumamoto, where the poisoning occurred, had not been covered by a special measures law that went into force in 2009 for victims of the disease, considered to be an origin of pollution issues in Japan.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |