※あなたの評決が子どもたちを救います。まだの方は今すぐ-->こちらから
◎大江健三郎さんが、9・19「さようなら原発集会」で発言した武藤類子さんさん宛てに、「世界市民法廷」に支持と支援を表明する手紙を書いていただきました。
詳細は近日中にお知らせしますが、敬愛する旧知のチョムスキーさんからのメッセージの”There is no better measure of the moral health of a society‥‥”に深く共感しました（下線は大江さん）、とありました。
◎柄谷行人さんから、「世界市民法廷」に以下のメッセージが寄せられました。
新たな“東京裁判”を
2012年1月30日月曜日
「新たな“東京裁判”を」 柄谷行人
※あなたの評決が子どもたちを救います。まだの方は今すぐ-->こちらから
３．１１以後まもなく、私は“東京裁判”のことを考えた。もちろん、それは第二次大戦後の東京裁判ではなく、東京電力・経産省など原発に関係する当局を裁く法廷である。当局は最初から、この事故の実態と被害の実情を隠蔽した。それによって生じる被害は甚大なものになるから、必ずその罪が問われるだろう。さらに、当局のやり方は、福島の住民あるいは日本人全般を欺くだけではない。放射性物質を空中に飛散させ海中に廃棄するこの事故は、広く海外の人たちに被害を及ぼすものであり、日本だけではすまない問題である。ゆえに、これは国際的な裁判になるだろう、と私は考えたのである。
同時に、私はこう考えた。それはかつての東京裁判のようなものではあってはならない、と。東京裁判は戦勝国が敗戦国を裁くものであった。しかし、一つには、それは、日本人が自ら戦争指導者を裁くことができなかったからである。また、その結果として、戦勝国に服従して原発を推進するような勢力の存続を許してしまった。したがって、原発事故の責任を問う“東京裁判”は、市民自らが担うものでなければならない。それが「世界市民法廷」である。
柄谷行人 公式サイト
３．１１以後まもなく、私は“東京裁判”のことを考えた。もちろん、それは第二次大戦後の東京裁判ではなく、東京電力・経産省など原発に関係する当局を裁く法廷である。当局は最初から、この事故の実態と被害の実情を隠蔽した。それによって生じる被害は甚大なものになるから、必ずその罪が問われるだろう。さらに、当局のやり方は、福島の住民あるいは日本人全般を欺くだけではない。放射性物質を空中に飛散させ海中に廃棄するこの事故は、広く海外の人たちに被害を及ぼすものであり、日本だけではすまない問題である。ゆえに、これは国際的な裁判になるだろう、と私は考えたのである。
同時に、私はこう考えた。それはかつての東京裁判のようなものではあってはならない、と。東京裁判は戦勝国が敗戦国を裁くものであった。しかし、一つには、それは、日本人が自ら戦争指導者を裁くことができなかったからである。また、その結果として、戦勝国に服従して原発を推進するような勢力の存続を許してしまった。したがって、原発事故の責任を問う“東京裁判”は、市民自らが担うものでなければならない。それが「世界市民法廷」である。
柄谷行人 公式サイト
2012年1月22日日曜日
疎開裁判の今（現状報告）
※あなたの評決が子どもたちを救います。まだの方は今すぐ-->こちらから
昨年12月16日の裁判所の「却下決定」を踏まえて、疎開裁判の現状を報告した動画を紹介します。
１、「ふくしま集団疎開裁判～子どもの被曝をめぐる判断を問う」
YouTube版 朝日ニュースター・OurPlanetTV
聞き手 白石草（OurPlanetTV）
ゲスト 弁護団 井戸謙一・柳原敏夫
２、人権の最貧民国入りを表明した「日本人の仕分けの夜明け」判決（1/14 脱原発世界会議）
動画（23分後） テキスト
発言者 弁護団 柳原敏夫
昨年12月16日の裁判所の「却下決定」を踏まえて、疎開裁判の現状を報告した動画を紹介します。
１、「ふくしま集団疎開裁判～子どもの被曝をめぐる判断を問う」
YouTube版 朝日ニュースター・OurPlanetTV
聞き手 白石草（OurPlanetTV）
ゲスト 弁護団 井戸謙一・柳原敏夫
２、人権の最貧民国入りを表明した「日本人の仕分けの夜明け」判決（1/14 脱原発世界会議）
動画（23分後） テキスト
発言者 弁護団 柳原敏夫
2012年1月18日水曜日
【速報】世界市民法廷の開催日、決定
※あなたの評決が子どもたちを救います。まだの方は今すぐ-->こちらから
「ふくしま集団疎開裁判」の世界市民法廷を以下の日程・場所で開催することが決まりました（確定）。
◎東京法廷
日時 ２０１２年２月２６日（日）午後１～５時
会場：日比谷コンベンションホール（千代田区立日比谷図書文化館）地下１F
日比谷公園内（旧・都立日比谷図書館）→地図
丸の内線・日比谷線・千代田線「霞ヶ関駅」C4・B2出口より徒歩約5分
定員：先着２０７名
中継 同時通訳とインタ－ネットにより全世界に同時中継。
◎郡山法廷
日時 ２０１２年３月１７日（土）午後１～５時
会場：郡山市男女共同参画センター（さんかくプラザ）２階 集会室
（郡山市麓山二丁目９番１号 TEL 024-924-0900）→地図
定員：先着１００名
中継 同時通訳とインタ－ネットにより全世界に同時中継。
「ふくしま集団疎開裁判」の世界市民法廷を以下の日程・場所で開催することが決まりました（確定）。
◎東京法廷
日時 ２０１２年２月２６日（日）午後１～５時
会場：日比谷コンベンションホール（千代田区立日比谷図書文化館）地下１F
日比谷公園内（旧・都立日比谷図書館）→地図
丸の内線・日比谷線・千代田線「霞ヶ関駅」C4・B2出口より徒歩約5分
定員：先着２０７名
中継 同時通訳とインタ－ネットにより全世界に同時中継。
◎郡山法廷
日時 ２０１２年３月１７日（土）午後１～５時
会場：郡山市男女共同参画センター（さんかくプラザ）２階 集会室
（郡山市麓山二丁目９番１号 TEL 024-924-0900）→地図
定員：先着１００名
中継 同時通訳とインタ－ネットにより全世界に同時中継。
2012年1月4日水曜日
賛同のお願い：人権侵害の決定にNO！を 放射能の危険に正しい判断を下す「ふくしま集団疎開裁判」世界市民法廷の開催にYES！を
※あなたの評決が子どもたちを救います。まだの方は今すぐ-->こちらから
中国語版-中国 韓国語版-한국 ロシア語版-русский
「私たちは１００％」昨年3月11日の福島第一原発事故により、チェルノブイリ避難基準の強制避難地域で教育を受ける福島県郡山市の14人の子どもです（以下の汚染マップ参照）。
その原発事故の加害者である国（文科省）「０％の人たち」は、何の責任もないふくしまの子どもたちの命を危険にさらして省みないという、加害者の自覚も教育行政責任者の自覚もない尋常の頭では信じられない方針を出しました。
「私たちは１００％」はこの前代未聞の不正義を黙っておれず、昨年６月24日に、「人権の最後の砦」である裁判所に「子供たちを安全な場所で教育せよ」と救済を求める裁判（仮処分申立）を起こしました。
裁判所は、前例のない裁判ということで門前払いせず、被ばくによる子どもたちの健康被害の可能性の有無について実体審理に入り、申立人は、
①．子どもたちを空間線量年間１mSv以上の地域で教育させることは憲法に基づく「子どもたちを安全な環境で教育する義務」に違反すること（申立書）、
②．通学する小中学校は、外部被ばくだけで控え目に計算しても空間線量が年間１２．７～２４mSvに達すること（報告書４頁）、
③．チェルノブイリで郡山市と放射能汚染度が同程度の地域で発生した深刻な健康被害が今後郡山市でも予想されること
を専門家の意見書（矢ヶ崎意見書第１章・松井意見書第２章）等により証明しました。
しかし、裁判所は、10月末の審理終了から45日の沈黙ののち、野田総理の「冷温停止」宣言と同じ12月16日に、子どもたちの申立を却下する「避難停止」を宣言（決定）しました。この決定は、裁判による世直しという子どもたちの期待を裏切り、原発事故の加害者である国と自治体による凶悪な人権侵害行為にお墨付きを与えた、最悪の人権侵害行為です。子どもの人権侵害の歴史に永遠の汚点を残すこの決定をぜったいに許す訳にはいきません（その詳細は、コメント(1) コメント(2) コメント(3)を参照）。
そこで、次の２つの賛同アピールの呼びかけです。
【賛同アピール１】
いま、日本中、世界中の人たちがこの人権侵害の決定にNO！と表明し、この決定が誤りであることを世の中に示して、我々市民の手で誤りをただしていきましょう。
【賛同アピール２】
司法の自殺により機能不全に陥った裁判所に代わって、命の危険にされされているふくしまの子どもたちを救うために、世界中の市民から構成される陪審員の手によって、放射能の危険について正しい判断を下す世界市民法廷を設置し、開催することに決めました。世界市民法廷は真理と正義とそしていのちに対する無条件の愛を基本原理とする、21世紀の市民型紛争解決機関です。いま、日本中、世界中の人たちがこの新しい世界市民法廷の誕生をYES！と表明し、これを支持することを世に示して、「市民の、市民による、市民のための世界市民法廷」による世直しを力強く支えましょう。
なお、疎開裁判をもう少し知りたい方は→ビラ（表・裏）（2011.12.10）
もっと詳細を知りたい方→提出書面一覧表・主張対比表
※ 賛同表明は□のチェックだけでＯＫ。それ以上必要ありません。
※ 賛同は署名とちがうので、既に署名した方も賛同表明をお願いします。
※ 携帯からは賛同表明できません。パソコンからお願いします。
中国語版-中国 韓国語版-한국 ロシア語版-русский
「私たちは１００％」昨年3月11日の福島第一原発事故により、チェルノブイリ避難基準の強制避難地域で教育を受ける福島県郡山市の14人の子どもです（以下の汚染マップ参照）。
クリックで拡大
その原発事故の加害者である国（文科省）「０％の人たち」は、何の責任もないふくしまの子どもたちの命を危険にさらして省みないという、加害者の自覚も教育行政責任者の自覚もない尋常の頭では信じられない方針を出しました。
「私たちは１００％」はこの前代未聞の不正義を黙っておれず、昨年６月24日に、「人権の最後の砦」である裁判所に「子供たちを安全な場所で教育せよ」と救済を求める裁判（仮処分申立）を起こしました。
裁判所は、前例のない裁判ということで門前払いせず、被ばくによる子どもたちの健康被害の可能性の有無について実体審理に入り、申立人は、
①．子どもたちを空間線量年間１mSv以上の地域で教育させることは憲法に基づく「子どもたちを安全な環境で教育する義務」に違反すること（申立書）、
②．通学する小中学校は、外部被ばくだけで控え目に計算しても空間線量が年間１２．７～２４mSvに達すること（報告書４頁）、
③．チェルノブイリで郡山市と放射能汚染度が同程度の地域で発生した深刻な健康被害が今後郡山市でも予想されること
を専門家の意見書（矢ヶ崎意見書第１章・松井意見書第２章）等により証明しました。
しかし、裁判所は、10月末の審理終了から45日の沈黙ののち、野田総理の「冷温停止」宣言と同じ12月16日に、子どもたちの申立を却下する「避難停止」を宣言（決定）しました。この決定は、裁判による世直しという子どもたちの期待を裏切り、原発事故の加害者である国と自治体による凶悪な人権侵害行為にお墨付きを与えた、最悪の人権侵害行為です。子どもの人権侵害の歴史に永遠の汚点を残すこの決定をぜったいに許す訳にはいきません（その詳細は、コメント(1) コメント(2) コメント(3)を参照）。
そこで、次の２つの賛同アピールの呼びかけです。
【賛同アピール１】
いま、日本中、世界中の人たちがこの人権侵害の決定にNO！と表明し、この決定が誤りであることを世の中に示して、我々市民の手で誤りをただしていきましょう。
【賛同アピール２】
司法の自殺により機能不全に陥った裁判所に代わって、命の危険にされされているふくしまの子どもたちを救うために、世界中の市民から構成される陪審員の手によって、放射能の危険について正しい判断を下す世界市民法廷を設置し、開催することに決めました。世界市民法廷は真理と正義とそしていのちに対する無条件の愛を基本原理とする、21世紀の市民型紛争解決機関です。いま、日本中、世界中の人たちがこの新しい世界市民法廷の誕生をYES！と表明し、これを支持することを世に示して、「市民の、市民による、市民のための世界市民法廷」による世直しを力強く支えましょう。
なお、疎開裁判をもう少し知りたい方は→ビラ（表・裏）（2011.12.10）
もっと詳細を知りたい方→提出書面一覧表・主張対比表
※ 賛同表明は□のチェックだけでＯＫ。それ以上必要ありません。
※ 賛同は署名とちがうので、既に署名した方も賛同表明をお願いします。
※ 携帯からは賛同表明できません。パソコンからお願いします。
【速報】ノーム･チョムスキーが「ふくしま集団疎開裁判」と世界市民法廷に支持と支援の表明
※あなたの評決が子どもたちを救います。まだの方は今すぐ-->こちらから
「ふくしま集団疎開裁判」に個人的な支援ができることを光栄に思います。
社会が道徳的に健全であるかどうかをはかる基準として、社会の最も弱い立場の人たちのことを社会がどう取り扱うかという基準に勝るものはなく、
許し難い行為の犠牲者となっている子どもたち以上に傷つきやすい存在、大切な存在はありません。
日本にとって、そして世界中の私たち全員にとって、この法廷は失敗が許されないテスト（試練）なのです。」
ノーム・チョムスキー （２０１２年１月１２日）
原文
It is a privilege to be able to lend personal support to the Fukushima Evacuate Children Lawsuit. There is no better measure of the moral health of a society than how it treats the most vulnerable people within it, and none or more vulnerable, or more precious, than children who are the victims of unconscionable actions. For Japan, and for all of us, this is a test that we must not fail.
Noam Chomsky
昨年１２月１６日に、ふくしま集団疎開裁判に対する裁判所（福島地裁郡山支部）の判決（決定）が下されました。
それは、全体主義国家ソ連崩壊後の混乱期に実施されたチョルノブイリ避難基準に従った住民避難にも、軍国主義だった日本の第二次大戦末期に実施された学童疎開にも劣る、我が国が人権の最貧民国に成り下がったことを世界に宣言する、人権の歴史に永遠の汚点を残し、人権保障が宣言された終戦以来の司法の歴史６５年間を失うような判断でした。
司法もまた、今、「司法の崩壊」＝機能不全の危機にあることを明らかにしました。
このような間接民主主義の危機のとき、これを克服する一つの道は直接民主主義の行使、多くの市民の手による良識の声です。それは最初、弱々しい「つぶやき」かもしれません。しかし、その「つぶやき」が真実の力と正義の力を備えているならば、決して消えることはありません。必ず、多くの人たちの胸に届き、受け入れられます。
私たちがこれから開こうとする「世界市民法廷」も、そのような真実の力と正義の力を備えた市民の判断を探究し、表明するための場です。
その「世界市民法廷」の場に、世界最高の知性と倫理と勇気を兼ね備えた思想家・アクティビストの ノーム･チョムスキーが協力を快諾してくれました。
チョムスキーの参加により、「世界市民法廷」で探究し、表明する市民の判断が、以前にもまして、真実の力と正義の力を備えることになることを確信します。
以上、チョムスキーからのメッセージでした。
※ 参考
チョムスキーの政治的発言の日本語訳アーカイブ
チョムスキーとメディア（YouTube）
ハワード・ジンとの共同インタビューその他（デモクラシーナウ！2007.4.16）
「中心の崩壊～ラディカルな想像力の再考」（2010.5.31）
「ふくしま集団疎開裁判」に個人的な支援ができることを光栄に思います。
社会が道徳的に健全であるかどうかをはかる基準として、社会の最も弱い立場の人たちのことを社会がどう取り扱うかという基準に勝るものはなく、
許し難い行為の犠牲者となっている子どもたち以上に傷つきやすい存在、大切な存在はありません。
日本にとって、そして世界中の私たち全員にとって、この法廷は失敗が許されないテスト（試練）なのです。」
ノーム・チョムスキー （２０１２年１月１２日）
原文
＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊
On 2012/01/12, at 11:50, Noam Chomsky wrote:It is a privilege to be able to lend personal support to the Fukushima Evacuate Children Lawsuit. There is no better measure of the moral health of a society than how it treats the most vulnerable people within it, and none or more vulnerable, or more precious, than children who are the victims of unconscionable actions. For Japan, and for all of us, this is a test that we must not fail.
Noam Chomsky
昨年１２月１６日に、ふくしま集団疎開裁判に対する裁判所（福島地裁郡山支部）の判決（決定）が下されました。
それは、全体主義国家ソ連崩壊後の混乱期に実施されたチョルノブイリ避難基準に従った住民避難にも、軍国主義だった日本の第二次大戦末期に実施された学童疎開にも劣る、我が国が人権の最貧民国に成り下がったことを世界に宣言する、人権の歴史に永遠の汚点を残し、人権保障が宣言された終戦以来の司法の歴史６５年間を失うような判断でした。
司法もまた、今、「司法の崩壊」＝機能不全の危機にあることを明らかにしました。
このような間接民主主義の危機のとき、これを克服する一つの道は直接民主主義の行使、多くの市民の手による良識の声です。それは最初、弱々しい「つぶやき」かもしれません。しかし、その「つぶやき」が真実の力と正義の力を備えているならば、決して消えることはありません。必ず、多くの人たちの胸に届き、受け入れられます。
私たちがこれから開こうとする「世界市民法廷」も、そのような真実の力と正義の力を備えた市民の判断を探究し、表明するための場です。
その「世界市民法廷」の場に、世界最高の知性と倫理と勇気を兼ね備えた思想家・アクティビストの ノーム･チョムスキーが協力を快諾してくれました。
チョムスキーの参加により、「世界市民法廷」で探究し、表明する市民の判断が、以前にもまして、真実の力と正義の力を備えることになることを確信します。
以上、チョムスキーからのメッセージでした。
※ 参考
チョムスキーの政治的発言の日本語訳アーカイブ
チョムスキーとメディア（YouTube）
ハワード・ジンとの共同インタビューその他（デモクラシーナウ！2007.4.16）
「中心の崩壊～ラディカルな想像力の再考」（2010.5.31）
Court documents (excerpt)
・Application for a provisional disposition (24 June 2011)
・A Statement of Facts by Katsuma Yagasaki, Emeritus Professor at the Ryukyu University (8 September 2011)
・A Statement of Facts by Eisuke Matsui, Director, Gifu Environmental and Medical Institute (28 October 2011)
・The map about radioactive contamination (2 December 2011)
・The Court Judgment (16 December 2011)
・A Statement of Facts by Katsuma Yagasaki, Emeritus Professor at the Ryukyu University (8 September 2011)
・A Statement of Facts by Eisuke Matsui, Director, Gifu Environmental and Medical Institute (28 October 2011)
・The map about radioactive contamination (2 December 2011)
・The Court Judgment (16 December 2011)
Message from Noam Chomsky about support to the Fukushima Evacuate Children Lawsuit
On 2012/01/12, at 11:50, Noam Chomsky wrote:
It is a privilege to be able to lend personal support to the Fukushima Evacuate Children Lawsuit.
There is no better measure of the moral health of a society than how it treats the most vulnerable people within it, and none or more vulnerable, or more precious, than children who are the victims of unconscionable actions.
For Japan, and for all of us, this is a test that we must not fail.
It is a privilege to be able to lend personal support to the Fukushima Evacuate Children Lawsuit.
There is no better measure of the moral health of a society than how it treats the most vulnerable people within it, and none or more vulnerable, or more precious, than children who are the victims of unconscionable actions.
For Japan, and for all of us, this is a test that we must not fail.
世界から見た「ふくしま集団疎開裁判」
※あなたの評決が子どもたちを救います。まだの方は今すぐ-->こちらから
◎ミハイル・マリコ博士・エフゲーニヤ・ステパーノヴナ教授来日講演のお知らせ（2012.3.27）
「低線量被ばくと向き合う：チェルノブイリの教訓に学ぶ」講演会
◎バンダジェフスキー氏の院内講演「内部被ばくへ警鐘」（2012年3月19日）－＞書き起こし（一部）
◎ドイツZDFテレビ 「フクシマのうそ」（2012年3月12日ＮＨＫ ＢＳ放送）
ー＞書き起こし
◎菅谷松本市長「政府、汚染の深刻さを未だ理解せず」（2012.3.12）
◎韓国公共放送局（ＫＢＳ） 郡山と「ふくしま集団疎開裁判」 （2012年１月１０日放送）
＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊
チョムスキーは、政府、大企業（東電など）、マスメディアがメディアを通じて市民をコントロールする次の３つの方法を指摘します。
１、マスメディアはニュースを選別する。
→疎開裁判のニュースは選別し、流さない。昨年12月16日の却下判決をNHK、民放、朝日新聞はこぞって報道しなかった。
２、マスメディアは本当に重要な問題は語らない。
→ＮＨＫは福島県のゴルフ場が東電に除染を求めた仮処分申立の却下決定といった泡沫事件は全国報道するのに、福島県の子ども全員の命がかかっている疎開裁判の判決という「本当に重要な問題」は語らない。
３、マスメディアは人々を孤立させる。
→人々は、疎開させないのはおかしい！？と内心思っても、マスメディアは疎開裁判のような重要な報道はしないから、結局、その思いを誰にも語れず、人々は互いに孤立に陥る。
４、結論
→今回に限らず、日本（のマスメディアの中）にいては重要な問題は分かりません。
→真実を知るためには、 日本のマスメディアの外に出る必要があります。日本のマスメディアの外に通じる道は２つあります。
５、日本のマスメディアの外（１）
→海外のメディア
例 韓国公共放送局（ＫＢＳ） 郡山と「ふくしま集団疎開裁判」 （2012年１月１０日放送）
６、 日本のマスメディアの外（２）
→日本のインディペンデント・メディア
◎ミハイル・マリコ博士・エフゲーニヤ・ステパーノヴナ教授来日講演のお知らせ（2012.3.27）
「低線量被ばくと向き合う：チェルノブイリの教訓に学ぶ」講演会
◎バンダジェフスキー氏の院内講演「内部被ばくへ警鐘」（2012年3月19日）－＞書き起こし（一部）
◎ドイツZDFテレビ 「フクシマのうそ」（2012年3月12日ＮＨＫ ＢＳ放送）
ー＞書き起こし
◎菅谷松本市長「政府、汚染の深刻さを未だ理解せず」（2012.3.12）
◎韓国公共放送局（ＫＢＳ） 郡山と「ふくしま集団疎開裁判」 （2012年１月１０日放送）
＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊
チョムスキーは、政府、大企業（東電など）、マスメディアがメディアを通じて市民をコントロールする次の３つの方法を指摘します。
１、マスメディアはニュースを選別する。
→疎開裁判のニュースは選別し、流さない。昨年12月16日の却下判決をNHK、民放、朝日新聞はこぞって報道しなかった。
２、マスメディアは本当に重要な問題は語らない。
→ＮＨＫは福島県のゴルフ場が東電に除染を求めた仮処分申立の却下決定といった泡沫事件は全国報道するのに、福島県の子ども全員の命がかかっている疎開裁判の判決という「本当に重要な問題」は語らない。
３、マスメディアは人々を孤立させる。
→人々は、疎開させないのはおかしい！？と内心思っても、マスメディアは疎開裁判のような重要な報道はしないから、結局、その思いを誰にも語れず、人々は互いに孤立に陥る。
４、結論
→今回に限らず、日本（のマスメディアの中）にいては重要な問題は分かりません。
→真実を知るためには、 日本のマスメディアの外に出る必要があります。日本のマスメディアの外に通じる道は２つあります。
５、日本のマスメディアの外（１）
→海外のメディア
例 韓国公共放送局（ＫＢＳ） 郡山と「ふくしま集団疎開裁判」 （2012年１月１０日放送）
６、 日本のマスメディアの外（２）
→日本のインディペンデント・メディア
The map about radioactive contamination
14 children of Fukushima, the plaintiffs of the lawsuit, go to school everyday where the contamination level of radiation is dangerously high.
The map below shows air dose levels of radiation based on the data of “On the analysis of the radionuclide in the soil (cesium 134 and 137)”, announced by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology of Japan, August 30, in which we applied Chernobyl evacuation standard indicated as colored circles.
The map below shows air dose levels of radiation based on the data of “On the analysis of the radionuclide in the soil (cesium 134 and 137)”, announced by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology of Japan, August 30, in which we applied Chernobyl evacuation standard indicated as colored circles.
Click on the map to enlarge it!
A Statement of Facts by Katsuma Yagasaki, Emeritus Professor at the Ryukyu University
Chapter 1: Massive health effects were recognized after Chernobyl accident (1986) in areas with the same extent of pollution measured as in Koriyama City
The same or even more amount of radioactive dust from Chernobyl accident was released over Fukushima Pref. A soil contamination survey published by the Science Ministry on August 30, 2011 (Appendix 500: Regarding the result of Soil Nuclides Analysis (Cs 134, 137)) shows the resulting serious pollution which is now officially recognized.
In Koriyama City 118 spots were measured where the simple average level of Cesium 137 concentration was found to be 161 kBq/m2. This is a level of 4.4 Ci / km2. With this in mind we can anticipate the possible health effects for the residents by looking at the city of Lugyny, Ukraine, where the same level of pollution was measured.
Lugyny is located 110~150 km west of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant and is seriously polluted. It is within the designated heavily polluted areas where their average Cesium 137 concentration is 1~5 Ci / km2（37～185kBq/m2）. Considering its distance from the plant its pollution level is relatively high. It is also located in the area where its converted air dose rate is almost up to 0.2μSv/ｈ.
Table 1 below compares the pollution levels between Koriyama City and Lugyny. Degrees of pollution are sorted according to the classification of radiation pollution zones set by the Ukraine government. While the combined ratio of mandatory evacuation zones and voluntary evacuation zones is 13.3 % in Lugyny, the corresponding combined ratio in Koriyama City is 16.1 %, indicating that the areas polluted in Koriyama City are larger with relatively higher pollution levels.
However while the ratio of non-controlled areas with lesser pollution is 1.5 % in Lugyny, the corresponding ratio in Koriyama City is 27.1 % showing Koriyama City includes much larger areas of this zone. Therefore, we can regard that the overall pollution level in Koriyama City is about same or more less compared with Lugyny and thus can duly expect the same consequences such as emergencies of children’s sickness as reported in Lugyny after the accident.
Table 1. Pollution Contrast Between Koriyama City and Lugyny
From these figures we can predict the expected health effects for the people in Koriyama City by looking at the results of health surveys taken after the Chernobyl accident.
The Figure 1 below shows dynamics of thyroid disease and thyroid tumor occurrences observed among the children in Lugyny, Ukraine.
In Lugyny there was a surge in the occurrence of both thyroid disease and thyroid tumors 5 or 6 years after the accident (April 26, 1986) and its subsequent result was that in 1995, 9 years after the accident, one out of ten children suffered thyroid disease. The incidence of cancer and other serious diseases was developed among more than 10 % of the children with thyroid diseases accounting for about 13 cases out of 1000. Many children indeed suffered from such serious diseases. Usually just one or two out of 100,000 children get thyroid cancer so this indicates an extraordinarily high incidence.
It is unconscionable to allow children to remain in this high radiation exposure environment considering the expected effects in relation to thyroid disease and cancer.
The survey data makes it clear that there will be extremely high rates of disease in the future among the children in Koriyama City and other areas in Fukushima Pref. In spite of such a serious prospect, the government has allowed these children to continue to be exposed, and not even offered them iodine tablets. This is an unforgivable “mindless act by the government”. However, it is not too late and measures to evacuate the children must be implemented immediately.
The same or even more amount of radioactive dust from Chernobyl accident was released over Fukushima Pref. A soil contamination survey published by the Science Ministry on August 30, 2011 (Appendix 500: Regarding the result of Soil Nuclides Analysis (Cs 134, 137)) shows the resulting serious pollution which is now officially recognized.
In Koriyama City 118 spots were measured where the simple average level of Cesium 137 concentration was found to be 161 kBq/m2. This is a level of 4.4 Ci / km2. With this in mind we can anticipate the possible health effects for the residents by looking at the city of Lugyny, Ukraine, where the same level of pollution was measured.
Lugyny is located 110~150 km west of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant and is seriously polluted. It is within the designated heavily polluted areas where their average Cesium 137 concentration is 1~5 Ci / km2（37～185kBq/m2）. Considering its distance from the plant its pollution level is relatively high. It is also located in the area where its converted air dose rate is almost up to 0.2μSv/ｈ.
Table 1 below compares the pollution levels between Koriyama City and Lugyny. Degrees of pollution are sorted according to the classification of radiation pollution zones set by the Ukraine government. While the combined ratio of mandatory evacuation zones and voluntary evacuation zones is 13.3 % in Lugyny, the corresponding combined ratio in Koriyama City is 16.1 %, indicating that the areas polluted in Koriyama City are larger with relatively higher pollution levels.
However while the ratio of non-controlled areas with lesser pollution is 1.5 % in Lugyny, the corresponding ratio in Koriyama City is 27.1 % showing Koriyama City includes much larger areas of this zone. Therefore, we can regard that the overall pollution level in Koriyama City is about same or more less compared with Lugyny and thus can duly expect the same consequences such as emergencies of children’s sickness as reported in Lugyny after the accident.
From these figures we can predict the expected health effects for the people in Koriyama City by looking at the results of health surveys taken after the Chernobyl accident.
The Figure 1 below shows dynamics of thyroid disease and thyroid tumor occurrences observed among the children in Lugyny, Ukraine.
In Lugyny there was a surge in the occurrence of both thyroid disease and thyroid tumors 5 or 6 years after the accident (April 26, 1986) and its subsequent result was that in 1995, 9 years after the accident, one out of ten children suffered thyroid disease. The incidence of cancer and other serious diseases was developed among more than 10 % of the children with thyroid diseases accounting for about 13 cases out of 1000. Many children indeed suffered from such serious diseases. Usually just one or two out of 100,000 children get thyroid cancer so this indicates an extraordinarily high incidence.
It is unconscionable to allow children to remain in this high radiation exposure environment considering the expected effects in relation to thyroid disease and cancer.
The survey data makes it clear that there will be extremely high rates of disease in the future among the children in Koriyama City and other areas in Fukushima Pref. In spite of such a serious prospect, the government has allowed these children to continue to be exposed, and not even offered them iodine tablets. This is an unforgivable “mindless act by the government”. However, it is not too late and measures to evacuate the children must be implemented immediately.
The Court Judgment
The Judgment
The Key Conclusion
The petition is rejected.
The basic facts and reasons
I. Purposes of the petition
1. The obligator should not conduct educational activities for the obligees in school facilities located on points in areas where the average values of the air dose measurement, as shown in the attached “List of Environmental Radiation Monitoring Results”, equal or exceed 0.2 micro-Sv per hour at 50 cm or 1 m in height.
2. The obligator must conduct educational activities for the obligees in school facilities located on points outside areas where the average air dose measurement, as shown in the attached “List of Environmental Radiation Monitoring”, equal or exceed 0.2 micro-Sv per hour at 50 cm or 1 m in height.
II. The factual background
In this petition, obligees inhabiting in Kohriyama City, Fukushima Prefecture, and attending elementary and junior high schools claim that their human lives, bodies and health are seriously threatened in such a dangerous situation as cumulative values of radiation doses at the schools they attend exceed the annual maximum permissive limit of 1 mSv per year, due to the nuclear accident at TEPCO’s Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant caused by the Touhoku district offshore Pacific Ocean earthquake, involving a large-scale leakage of radioactive materials, and demand the obligator to suspend educational activities in such dangerous areas and to conduct those activities outside such areas, based on the personal human rights and the right to claim to fulfill the duty to considerate safety.
III. Summary of reasons for the judgment
Mass evacuation of pupils and students, who are sensitive to radiation, may become an option from the perspective of a policy standpoint. But at the same time, considering that the obligator is also obligated to continue to conduct educational activities as far as pupils and students other than obligees also inhabit in the city, due to the nature of such activities it should be difficult to discriminate between such ones for the obligees and those for others in order to suspend the former alone. Considering it is acknowledged that the purpose of the obligees’ petition is, as a matter of practice, the overall suspension of educational activities at aforementioned elementary and junior high schools, including those for other pupils and students, it should be needed to strictly investigate requirements for fulfilling rights to be conserved.
Now, considering decontamination activities promoted by the obligator and results of radiation monitoring among other factors, it is not acknowledged that there are emergent and concrete threats to human lives and bodies of the obligees dangerous enough to require overall suspension of educational activities at elementary and junior high schools they attend without questioning the intentions of the rest of pupils and students, who also inhabit in Kohriyama City located outside the caution and evacuation-planned zones and attend the same schools as the obligees do.
Moreover, such suspension as the obligees require is not only measure for avoiding hazards to them, as they can adopt alternative one such as commuting to extramural schools, for instance.
Therefore, the rights to be preserved, claimed in the petition, are not acknowledged.
IV. The court judgment
(Snip)
(4) - - - -
According to the obligees’ petition in this issue, and also focusing our attention to the relation between it and many other pupils and students who themselves are not concerned here, the former must be said to be requiring overall suspension of the implementation of educational activities, of which the latter also actually receive the full benefit, regardless of their willingness. In such a case, it is adequate to consider that in order to acknowledge the petition, strict requirements are needed; i.e., there should be an emergent threat of damaging human life and body of each obligee; it should be evident that unrecoverable consequential injury are to be caused by such damage; and moreover, no proper alternative option is found as a measure to avoid such injury, weighing disadvantages and burdens for obligees, obligator and other stakeholders. - - - -
(5) In considering whether concrete rights to be preserved for the obligees should be acknowledged or not, it is noted that the existing national law adopts 1 mSv per year basis as the public dose limit in accordance with 2007 recommendations of ICRP, and the obligees, assuming such a regulatory, require measures including the suspension of the implementation of educational activities in areas where the air radiation doses are surely expected to exceed 1 mSv per year (0.2 micro-Sv per hour).
(6) However, fundamentally speaking, the impact on the probability of late-onset disorders such as cancer when receiving a radiation dose less than 100 mSv has not been empirically confirmed. Therefore, the dose limit in the radiation exposure scale-range under 100 mSv is set in accordance with assumption that some stochastic effects may occur even in the lower radiation exposure range in proportion to its level. In such a case, even though causality is unclear from a scientific perspective, and rather because it is unclear, standards are set in consideration of possible safety from a policy standpoint, and studies in radiation protection also adopt such an idea that exposure exceeding the amount of radiation present in nature should be as small as possible. In this sense, the 1 mSv standard of ICRP also should not be taken as the absolute one. Therefore, while on the one hand, as shown in the April 20, 2011 notification issued by the Ministry of Education, there is an approach of mitigating the annual limit to 1 - 20 mSv, on the other hand, critics claim that 1 mSv per year standard of the ICRP is insufficient in terms of safety, because it does not take the matters of internal exposures into account; and the 2010 recommendations of the European Committee on Radiation Risk (ECRR) setting 0.1 mSv as the standard for the annual public dose limit is in accordance with such the acknowledged fact.
(7) Therefore, the mass evacuation of more radiation sensitive pupils and students, which the obligees claim, may be one of options for the policy in order to ensure safety of them as far as there exist risks of radiation exposures larger than ordinal one, not only in those areas where annual air radiation doses exceed 1 mSv, but also in other areas where they are smaller than that value.
(8) However, such an option is a different matter from questioning whether there is such an unambiguous legal right for requiring the suspension as the obligees claim. For the latter investigation, understanding it is needed to consider whether there is the right to be preserved in accordance with requirements mentioned above in the paragraph (4), it can not be said that there is sufficient prime facie showing to prove fulfillment of such requirements.
A. First of all, such risks of damages on human lives and bodies caused by exposures as oboligees claim depend on the possibilities of the infringements on human lives and bodies which long-term low-dose exposures may stochastically result in. Indeed, such infringements on human lives and bodies can be said to be consequential damages hard to recover, but damage risks due to such infringements are mere undefined facts which depend on uncertain scales and time spans of the future exposures.
B. And, according to the above mentioned certified fact, it is possible to recognize that radiation doses at and around the primary and junior high schools the obligees attend have been reduced at the points after decontamination activities such as topsoil removal works among others conducted by the obligator. And also, so far as pupils and students do not stay still for 24 hours a day at the specific points where radiation doses are measured, but move around and conduct various indoor and outdoor activities, it can be acknowledged that the more realistic data at school facilities should be results of simplified integrating dosimeter monitoring conducted by staff members of those school facilities, and any of such measuring results at primary and junior high schools the obligees attend shows that radiation dose is lower than 0.2 micro-Sv per hour.
C. The obligees insist that, so far as monitoring conducted by the obligator was done as measurements conducted by the school staff members, who in fact usually stay in school buildings even while pupils and students stay on playgrounds, such measured values can not be trusted. But, given that since May, 2011, the obligator has been restricting outdoor activities such as physical education within 1 hour a day and sports club activities within 2 hours at primary and junior high schools in Kohriyama City, and regulating the former to be done indoor as far as possible and prohibiting the latter in rainy or windy days, it is hard to recognize that the radiation exposure doses of the obligees are significantly different from the above mentioned monitoring results. And also, measurement results in the TV show (A65 evidence) must be said to lack the prerequisite for comparison, given that they were measured under different conditions in Nihonmatsu City. And again, results measured by obligees’ parents (A63) are not sufficient to affect the reliability of the above mentioned monitoring results, given that differences in points and methods of measurements and aggregation methods inevitably lead to values different from above mentioned ones measured by the school staff.
E. Therefore, considering that it is expected that the advance in decontamination is to reduce the amount of future radiation, and recognizing the actual extent of radiation exposure of obligees at primary and junior high schools suggested from the above mentioned monitoring results, it is not fully acknowledged that there exist imminent dangers to their human lives and bodies. Concerning about risks of internal exposures, the obligees claim that they are exposed to such risks from inhalation of radioactive noble gasses and ingestion of soils and vegetables contaminated with radioactive materials, and have submitted written opinions (A49 evidence, A72, A73, A75, A76, A81, A82, etc.) describing dangers of contracting heart disease and cancer among others from internal exposures. Though risks of internal exposures noted in these opinions are not trivial, the concrete facts of presence or absence and extent of such internal exposure of each individual of the obligees are not yet clarified. Besides, given that the internal exposure is a long-term exposure to the radioactive materials which entered into a human body, the specific causation between “the suspension of educational activities conducted by the obligator for the obligees” at “school facilities located on the points where average measurement values of air dose rate at 50 cm or 1 m in height exceed 0.2 micro-Sv per hour” and prevention or elimination of the risks of internal exposures for the obligees is also not yet clarified. Therefore, these written opinions are not sufficient to directly confirm the existence of obligees’ rights to be preserved, concerning the provisional ruling requested in this issue. Though obligees claim that radiation dose accumulated since the occurrence of the Fukushima nuclear accident also should be considered, the actual past exposures can not be prevented in their nature with this petition. And also, given that the probability of receiving late injuries in radiation doses less than 100 mSv is not empirically verified, and that the annual dose limit of 20 mSv was set as the provisional guideline in the April 20 notification issued by the Ministry of Education, even though the annual radiation exposures are expected to exceed 1 mSv in total together with the past ones, it is not sufficiently acknowledged that such exposures directly cause emergent dangers to the human lives and bodies. Therefore, all told, for each individual of obligees, there is no prima-facie evidence sufficient enough to acknowledge the existence of dangers concrete and emergent enough to require the overall suspension of entire educational activities without questioning notions of other pupils and students who inhabit in Kohriyama City located outside caution and evacuation planned zones, and attend the same primary and junior high schools together with obligees.
The Key Conclusion
The petition is rejected.
The basic facts and reasons
I. Purposes of the petition
1. The obligator should not conduct educational activities for the obligees in school facilities located on points in areas where the average values of the air dose measurement, as shown in the attached “List of Environmental Radiation Monitoring Results”, equal or exceed 0.2 micro-Sv per hour at 50 cm or 1 m in height.
2. The obligator must conduct educational activities for the obligees in school facilities located on points outside areas where the average air dose measurement, as shown in the attached “List of Environmental Radiation Monitoring”, equal or exceed 0.2 micro-Sv per hour at 50 cm or 1 m in height.
II. The factual background
In this petition, obligees inhabiting in Kohriyama City, Fukushima Prefecture, and attending elementary and junior high schools claim that their human lives, bodies and health are seriously threatened in such a dangerous situation as cumulative values of radiation doses at the schools they attend exceed the annual maximum permissive limit of 1 mSv per year, due to the nuclear accident at TEPCO’s Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant caused by the Touhoku district offshore Pacific Ocean earthquake, involving a large-scale leakage of radioactive materials, and demand the obligator to suspend educational activities in such dangerous areas and to conduct those activities outside such areas, based on the personal human rights and the right to claim to fulfill the duty to considerate safety.
III. Summary of reasons for the judgment
Mass evacuation of pupils and students, who are sensitive to radiation, may become an option from the perspective of a policy standpoint. But at the same time, considering that the obligator is also obligated to continue to conduct educational activities as far as pupils and students other than obligees also inhabit in the city, due to the nature of such activities it should be difficult to discriminate between such ones for the obligees and those for others in order to suspend the former alone. Considering it is acknowledged that the purpose of the obligees’ petition is, as a matter of practice, the overall suspension of educational activities at aforementioned elementary and junior high schools, including those for other pupils and students, it should be needed to strictly investigate requirements for fulfilling rights to be conserved.
Now, considering decontamination activities promoted by the obligator and results of radiation monitoring among other factors, it is not acknowledged that there are emergent and concrete threats to human lives and bodies of the obligees dangerous enough to require overall suspension of educational activities at elementary and junior high schools they attend without questioning the intentions of the rest of pupils and students, who also inhabit in Kohriyama City located outside the caution and evacuation-planned zones and attend the same schools as the obligees do.
Moreover, such suspension as the obligees require is not only measure for avoiding hazards to them, as they can adopt alternative one such as commuting to extramural schools, for instance.
Therefore, the rights to be preserved, claimed in the petition, are not acknowledged.
IV. The court judgment
(Snip)
(4) - - - -
According to the obligees’ petition in this issue, and also focusing our attention to the relation between it and many other pupils and students who themselves are not concerned here, the former must be said to be requiring overall suspension of the implementation of educational activities, of which the latter also actually receive the full benefit, regardless of their willingness. In such a case, it is adequate to consider that in order to acknowledge the petition, strict requirements are needed; i.e., there should be an emergent threat of damaging human life and body of each obligee; it should be evident that unrecoverable consequential injury are to be caused by such damage; and moreover, no proper alternative option is found as a measure to avoid such injury, weighing disadvantages and burdens for obligees, obligator and other stakeholders. - - - -
(5) In considering whether concrete rights to be preserved for the obligees should be acknowledged or not, it is noted that the existing national law adopts 1 mSv per year basis as the public dose limit in accordance with 2007 recommendations of ICRP, and the obligees, assuming such a regulatory, require measures including the suspension of the implementation of educational activities in areas where the air radiation doses are surely expected to exceed 1 mSv per year (0.2 micro-Sv per hour).
(6) However, fundamentally speaking, the impact on the probability of late-onset disorders such as cancer when receiving a radiation dose less than 100 mSv has not been empirically confirmed. Therefore, the dose limit in the radiation exposure scale-range under 100 mSv is set in accordance with assumption that some stochastic effects may occur even in the lower radiation exposure range in proportion to its level. In such a case, even though causality is unclear from a scientific perspective, and rather because it is unclear, standards are set in consideration of possible safety from a policy standpoint, and studies in radiation protection also adopt such an idea that exposure exceeding the amount of radiation present in nature should be as small as possible. In this sense, the 1 mSv standard of ICRP also should not be taken as the absolute one. Therefore, while on the one hand, as shown in the April 20, 2011 notification issued by the Ministry of Education, there is an approach of mitigating the annual limit to 1 - 20 mSv, on the other hand, critics claim that 1 mSv per year standard of the ICRP is insufficient in terms of safety, because it does not take the matters of internal exposures into account; and the 2010 recommendations of the European Committee on Radiation Risk (ECRR) setting 0.1 mSv as the standard for the annual public dose limit is in accordance with such the acknowledged fact.
(7) Therefore, the mass evacuation of more radiation sensitive pupils and students, which the obligees claim, may be one of options for the policy in order to ensure safety of them as far as there exist risks of radiation exposures larger than ordinal one, not only in those areas where annual air radiation doses exceed 1 mSv, but also in other areas where they are smaller than that value.
(8) However, such an option is a different matter from questioning whether there is such an unambiguous legal right for requiring the suspension as the obligees claim. For the latter investigation, understanding it is needed to consider whether there is the right to be preserved in accordance with requirements mentioned above in the paragraph (4), it can not be said that there is sufficient prime facie showing to prove fulfillment of such requirements.
A. First of all, such risks of damages on human lives and bodies caused by exposures as oboligees claim depend on the possibilities of the infringements on human lives and bodies which long-term low-dose exposures may stochastically result in. Indeed, such infringements on human lives and bodies can be said to be consequential damages hard to recover, but damage risks due to such infringements are mere undefined facts which depend on uncertain scales and time spans of the future exposures.
B. And, according to the above mentioned certified fact, it is possible to recognize that radiation doses at and around the primary and junior high schools the obligees attend have been reduced at the points after decontamination activities such as topsoil removal works among others conducted by the obligator. And also, so far as pupils and students do not stay still for 24 hours a day at the specific points where radiation doses are measured, but move around and conduct various indoor and outdoor activities, it can be acknowledged that the more realistic data at school facilities should be results of simplified integrating dosimeter monitoring conducted by staff members of those school facilities, and any of such measuring results at primary and junior high schools the obligees attend shows that radiation dose is lower than 0.2 micro-Sv per hour.
C. The obligees insist that, so far as monitoring conducted by the obligator was done as measurements conducted by the school staff members, who in fact usually stay in school buildings even while pupils and students stay on playgrounds, such measured values can not be trusted. But, given that since May, 2011, the obligator has been restricting outdoor activities such as physical education within 1 hour a day and sports club activities within 2 hours at primary and junior high schools in Kohriyama City, and regulating the former to be done indoor as far as possible and prohibiting the latter in rainy or windy days, it is hard to recognize that the radiation exposure doses of the obligees are significantly different from the above mentioned monitoring results. And also, measurement results in the TV show (A65 evidence) must be said to lack the prerequisite for comparison, given that they were measured under different conditions in Nihonmatsu City. And again, results measured by obligees’ parents (A63) are not sufficient to affect the reliability of the above mentioned monitoring results, given that differences in points and methods of measurements and aggregation methods inevitably lead to values different from above mentioned ones measured by the school staff.
E. Therefore, considering that it is expected that the advance in decontamination is to reduce the amount of future radiation, and recognizing the actual extent of radiation exposure of obligees at primary and junior high schools suggested from the above mentioned monitoring results, it is not fully acknowledged that there exist imminent dangers to their human lives and bodies. Concerning about risks of internal exposures, the obligees claim that they are exposed to such risks from inhalation of radioactive noble gasses and ingestion of soils and vegetables contaminated with radioactive materials, and have submitted written opinions (A49 evidence, A72, A73, A75, A76, A81, A82, etc.) describing dangers of contracting heart disease and cancer among others from internal exposures. Though risks of internal exposures noted in these opinions are not trivial, the concrete facts of presence or absence and extent of such internal exposure of each individual of the obligees are not yet clarified. Besides, given that the internal exposure is a long-term exposure to the radioactive materials which entered into a human body, the specific causation between “the suspension of educational activities conducted by the obligator for the obligees” at “school facilities located on the points where average measurement values of air dose rate at 50 cm or 1 m in height exceed 0.2 micro-Sv per hour” and prevention or elimination of the risks of internal exposures for the obligees is also not yet clarified. Therefore, these written opinions are not sufficient to directly confirm the existence of obligees’ rights to be preserved, concerning the provisional ruling requested in this issue. Though obligees claim that radiation dose accumulated since the occurrence of the Fukushima nuclear accident also should be considered, the actual past exposures can not be prevented in their nature with this petition. And also, given that the probability of receiving late injuries in radiation doses less than 100 mSv is not empirically verified, and that the annual dose limit of 20 mSv was set as the provisional guideline in the April 20 notification issued by the Ministry of Education, even though the annual radiation exposures are expected to exceed 1 mSv in total together with the past ones, it is not sufficiently acknowledged that such exposures directly cause emergent dangers to the human lives and bodies. Therefore, all told, for each individual of obligees, there is no prima-facie evidence sufficient enough to acknowledge the existence of dangers concrete and emergent enough to require the overall suspension of entire educational activities without questioning notions of other pupils and students who inhabit in Kohriyama City located outside caution and evacuation planned zones, and attend the same primary and junior high schools together with obligees.
Application for a provisional disposition ( 24 June 2011 )
Application for a provisional disposition
24 June 2011
To: Koriyama Branch, Fukushima District Court
Petitioners: 14 children who attend elementary/junior-high schools in City of Koriyama
The other party: Koriyama City Council
Purpose of this application
1 The other party must refer to the attached table of environmental radiation monitoring results and must not enforce educational activities for these petitioners in school facilities at which average radiation dose as stated in the attached table of Environmental Radiation Monitoring Results exceeds 0.2microsievert(mSv) per hour, either at 50cm or 1m above ground.
2 The other party must implement educational activities for the petitioners. This should be done using school facilities at which average radiation dose does not exceed 0.2mSv/h.
We ask Koriyama District Court to judge upon these appeals.
Reasons for the appeal
Ⅰ Concerned parties
1 Petitioners
Children from Koriyama City who are attending local elementary schools or junior-high schools.
2 The other party
Education Committee of City Council of Koriyama, which is a competent authority that is supposed to implement appropriate education for the children in the city’s elementary and junior high schools, nursery schools and kinder gardens.
Ⅱ Sequence of events
1 Location of Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant
Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant is a nuclear power plant that belongs to Tokyo Electric Power Company in City of Ookuma, Futaba-gun, Fukushima prefecture.
2 Fukushima Nuclear Accident
Following Great Northeastern Earthquake and tsunami that occurred on 11 March 2011, external power supply was lost in the reactors that had been in operation at Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant. Emergency diesel generators did not work, and the plant lost all of its power supply. As a result, the reactors and spent fuel pool lost the crucial coolant system, leading to the most deadly nuclear accident in the world history since Chernobyl. Suppression chambers were damaged in two of the reactors, followed hydrogen explosions inside the reactor buildings. As a result, massive amount of highly radioactive materials from the fuel rods began to leak into the outside environment. It has not been converged yet, still leaking this very day into the air and the sea water. Such an accident is clearly unprecedented in the world history, simply beyond Chernobyl.
3 Spreading of radioactive elements into the environment caused by the Fukushima accident
Fukushima nuclear accident has contaminated vast area of Japan, mainly Tohoku (northeastern areas of Japan) and Kanto region (the Greater Tokyo Area and seven prefectures: Gunma, Tochigi, Ibaraki, Saitama, Tokyo, Chiba, and Kanagawa) and the Pacific Ocean. Food products, tap water, sea water and soil have been seriously contaminated. The extent of the problem is just phenomenal.
4 Counter measures taken by the Japanese government
Japanese government has issued an evacuation order to areas within 20km (a concentric circle) from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant on 12 March, which was followed by “indoor evacuation order” on 15 March to areas within 30km from the plant. On 22 April, the 20km zone was declared as a “no-go zone”.
5 Counter measures taken by Japan’s Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology(MEXT)
Radioactive contamination swallowed school facilities too and for each school building and playground, it was deemed necessary to make a decision as to whether or not they could be used for educational purposes. On 19 April, Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, or MEXT, issued a notice addressed to Education Committee of Fukushima’s prefectural government, in which it was stated that if cumulative dose was predicted to be between 1 and 20 mSv per year, the facility can be used for education. This was “an interim criterion”. Then, the MEXT made an amendment on 27 May, declaring that they shall “aim to” regard 1mSv as an acceptable yearly limit for schools.
Ⅲ Rights to be protected
１ General remarks
However, annual cumulative dose since the first day of the Fukushima nuclear accident is going to be higher than 1 mSv in most of the Fukushima prefecture. Considering the health effects of radiation, the possibility for the children to suffer from radiation-induced diseases such as cancer or leukemia in the future will be quite high, if they continue to attend elementary/junior high schools, nursery schools and kinder gardens in the prefecture. For the children, moral interests are life, body and health, but all of them are now facing a serious threat.
2 Health effects of radiation
(omitted)
6.Conclusion
We have already reached a point where cumulative annual dose since the first day of Fukushima nuclear accident would exceed 1 mSv in the Fukushima prefecture. The children are of course still growing physically, with frequent cell divisions occurring inside their bodies, hence the most vulnerable. If they continue to attend elementary/junior high schools, nursery schools and kinder gardens in the Fukushima prefecture, as recommended by the MEXT, there is a possibility that they will suffer from diseases including cancer or leukemia as late radiation injury. Genetic effects can also be caused by radiation, which would then remain in the DNA for generations. It is an indisputable fact that life, body and health of the children, the most valuable moral interests, are facing a serious threat at this moment.
3 Basis for “1 mSv/Year” standard
Introduction
Scientific opinions are still divided as to what would be the acceptable annual dose limit for the public to protect their health. The MEXT claims to follow recommendations by International Commission on Radiological Protections (ICRP), which is basically 1 mSv per year.
ICRP2007 recommendations
After international criticisms mounted for some time, the ICRP admitted in the 1985 statement issued in Paris that its annual dose limit of 5 mSv, which was what they had recommended back in 1977, was too high for the public, and they lowered the limit to 1mSv. To this, Radiation Health Protection Agency of the UK made a response by recommending a stricter limit of 0.5mSv per year, reflecting the contamination caused by Sellafield nuclear fuel reprocessing plant.
Also there was Professor Alice Stewart. She was the first scientist in the world who discovered the health effects of exposure to low-level radiation. She was also the first scientific secretary of European Committee of Radiation Risk (ECRR). Prof. Stewart submitted an open letter of inquiry to the ICRP, asking for a substantial revision of the standard. But they refused it, claiming that it was satisfactory enough that they had already lowered the limit from 5 mSv to 1 mSv per year. As a result, ICRP1990 recommendation held the same limit of 1mSv, which was then inherited onto ICRP2007 recommendation. The latter was merely a slight revision of the previous recommendations.
ECRR2010 recommendations
However, European Committee of Radiation Risk (ECRR) argued in its 2010 recommendations as follows; “The total maximum permissible dose to members of the public arising from all human practices should not be more than 0.1mSv, with a value of 2 mSv for nuclear workers” (14., Executive Summary, ECRR2010). So, only a tenth of the ICRP limit. The ECRR claimed that “this would severely curtail the operation of nuclear power stations and reprocessing plants, and this reflects the Committee’s belief that nuclear power is a costly way of producing energy when human health deficits are included in the overall assessment. All new practices must be justified in such a way that the rights of all individuals are considered. Radiological exposures must be kept as low as reasonably achievable using best available technology. Finally, the environmental consequences of radioactive discharges must be assessed in relation to the total environment, including both direct and indirect effects on all living systems”. ( ibid.)
Reflecting ICRP2007 recommendation onto domestic regulations
Basic Group from the MEXT’s Radiation Committee came up with a report called “Reflecting ICRP2007 recommendations (Pub.103) onto domestic regulations (Second Intermediary Report)” on 12 January 2011, which was then approved on 28 January at its Board meeting. In this report, the Group recommended and explained that the purpose was “to rigidly follow the 1mSv rule as an annual dose limit for the members of the public”.
Domestic laws
Current Japanese domestic laws are also constituted on the basis of this 1mSv annual dose limit for the public.
4 Cumulative dose
Introduction
Since 11 March 2011, the children in the Fukushima prefecture have been continuously living in a dangerous situation where they have been receiving both types of radiation exposure; internal and external. In order to save them immediately, we shall calculate the cumulative dose by just concentrating on the external exposure. Since the internal exposure is considered to be the more dangerous than the external exposure, it should mean that the situation is indeed extremely hazardous for the children if the level of external exposure is proved to be dangerous enough on its own
.
Cumulative dose at seven elementary/junior high schools that the petitioners attend
In order to calculate the cumulative dose at seven elementary/junior high schools that the petitioners attend, we shall utilize a table called “Estimation of cumulative dose at various locations of Fukushima Prefecture” that the MEXT has made. It is based on the results of measurements that the MEXT carried out between 0600hours of 12 March 2011 and 2400hours of 25 May at Toyoda-machi, Koriyama City. This was a good basis, because all the school facilities that the petitioners attend are located within 5km distance from this geographical point. As a result, we found out that cumulative dose at this point between 12 March and 25 May 2011 (75 days) was as high as 2.9 mSv. Moreover, radiation dose at the very schools that the petitioners attend turned out to be about 1.3-2.3 times higher than that of Toyoda-machi. That means cumulative dose between 12 March and 25 May at the petitioners’ schools must have been at least 3.8 mSv (2.9 mSv×1.3) and could have been 6.67 mSv (2.9 mSv×2.3) at maximum.
Therefore, the petitioners have been exposed to cumulative dose of between 3.8mSv and 6.67mSv just for 75 days, 3.8-6.67 times over the annual exposure limit of 1mSv. That is significant, considering the fact that it was for external exposure only. And the calculation was unfairly done too, since we adopted the MEXT’s method and used “shielding coefficient” of 0.6 for wooden buildings (The MEXT seems to claim that wooden buildings have such a shielding effect against radiation).
Estimation of total cumulative dose per year
In the MEXT’s table “Estimation of cumulative dose at various locations”, there are two sets of results. One is “Cumulative dose between 12 March and 25 May” and the second is “Estimated total cumulative dose per year”. We can assume what the “Estimated total cumulative dose per year” would be by searching for the most approximate “Cumulative dose between 12 March and 25 May” on the table. So in that way, cumulative dose for a year up to 11 March 2012 at seven schools that the petitioners go to would be as much as 12.7-24mSv. That is, again, just for external exposure, and even with using the “shielding coefficient”.
Schools in the Fukushima prefecture at which cumulative dose per year would be estimated to exceed 1mSv:
At locations where average radiation dose was measured to be higher than 0.2mSv/hour between 23 and 25 May, we can assume that cumulative dose per year would certainly be higher than 1mSv. 55 out of 60 locations in Koriyama City exceeded 0.2mSv/h. Five locations in the City did not reach 0.2mSv/h, but 0.17mSv/hour was measured at three out of that five. It is highly likely that annually they would exceed 1mSv. All of 32 locations measured in Fukushima City exceeded 0.2mSv/h.
(Omitted)
Conclusion
There are 266 schools in the Fukushima prefecture. And there are 243 locations where it is assumed that the yearly cumulative dose would exceed 1mSv for certain. At 18 locations, the possibility of exceeding 1mSv/year is quite high and there are 5 locations where it is unlikely to be so.
Health effects of radiation are caused by different types of radiological exposure and can take many routes. As for the external exposure, we must not forget that radioactive materials that have fallen onto the ground must also be taken into account, apart from just looking at “dose” measured in the air. As for the internal exposure, we must note that radioactive materials can get into human body through breathing, eating and drinking.
For the children of Fukushima to be protected, all of these must be considered and the level of radiological exposure they get must stay under 1mSv annually in total. It is not easy to measure the levels of exposure in each route accurately. But obviously the level of total radiological exposure for the children will greatly exceed 1mSv if they are to receive education at school facilities within areas where the “dose” on its own is already higher than 1mSv.
Therefore, if the authorities continue to implement educational activities in areas where it is already certain or predictable that the cumulative annual dose exceeds 1mSv/year, it is clear that the children will face great danger of developing cancer and leukemia from radiation exposure. And that is only by attending these elementary/junior high schools, nursery schools and kindergarden in the region. This act seriously violates children’s moral interests; life, body and health.
Ⅶ The rights of children in the Fukushima prefecture
The right to receive education
First clause from Article 26 of Japanese constitution stipulates that “All people shall have the right to receive an equal education correspondent to their ability, as provided by law.” Then in the latter half of its second clause, “Such compulsory education shall be free”. The right to receive education naturally includes “right to receive education safely”. So it is constitutionally guaranteed that the children have the right to receive education without damages to life, body and health. This needs to be realized especially in the circumstances since Fukushima nuclear accident.
The right to life (moral interests)
Article 25 of Japanese constitution stipulates that “all people shall have the right to maintain the minimum standards of wholesome and cultured living” and “in all spheres of life, the State shall use its endeavors for the promotion and extension of social welfare and security, and of public health”. Article 13 stipulates that “All of the people shall be respected as individuals. Their right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness shall, to the extent that it does not interfere with the public welfare, be the supreme consideration in legislation and in other governmental affairs”. Therefore Japanese people naturally and clearly have the right to be protected from any damages to life, body and health that are caused by massive amount of radioactive materials released from Fukushima nuclear power plant.
Health measures at school
Article 12 of School Education Law stipulates that the providers of education must implement regular health checks and other necessary measures to protect and promote children’s health. It means that children and their parents have the right to demand implementation of appropriate health measures.
The best interests of the children
The first clause of Article 3 from Convention on the Rights of the Child is absolutely crucial for resolving this matter: “In all actions concerning children, whether undertaken by public or private social welfare institutions, courts of law, administrative authorities or legislative bodies, the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration.”
Ⅷ Duties of the other party
Duty to give safety considerations
The Japanese government, Fukushima Prefectural government and local municipalities within the Fukushima prefecture must fulfill the rights of the children that we noted so far, especially the one based on Article 26 of the Japanese constitution. They have a duty to give safety considerations and to take necessary measures so that life, body and health of the children are protected.
Since 11 March, the situation in the Fukushima prefecture is the one where great amount of radioactivity has been continuously leaking into the environment from the nearby Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. They must actively take necessary measures to prevent implementation of educational activities in the red zone, so that the children will not develop radiation-induced cancer or leukemia later. Life, body and health of the children must not be damaged.
Article 26 of School Health Safety Law stipulates that “Education providers must implement necessary measurements to fully maintain its facilities, equipment and the management system, so that children can be prevented from danger caused by any potential accidents, attacks or disasters. They must be able to deal with any potential danger or hazard caused to the children by accidents etc.”. This is clearly a reflection of the previously-mentioned “duty to give safety considerations”.
Locations of elementary and junior high schools
Regarding the locations of schools, Article 38 of School Education Law states that “local municipalities must build schools in the local areas for the children to attend”, which is of course just a general rule. It is acceptable to give educational activities outside the local areas, if it is inevitable, as written in a notice issued by the MEXT on 23 April 1959.
Even just between 12 March and 25 May 2011, cumulative dose at the petitioners’ schools reached 3.8 mSv at minimum, and 6.67 mSv at maximum, because of the massive fallout from the Fukushima nuclear power plant. The level is 3.8-6.67 times higher than the 1 mSv annual dose limit for the public, creating an extremely hazardous situation endangering life, body and health of the children.
Conclusion
It is a duty of the other party to give safety considerations and to protect life, body and health of the petitioners. Providing education in a red zone is a violation of this duty and it is totally unacceptable. They have a legal obligation to move elementary and junior high schools to outside areas immediately. And local municipalities must bear the costs, since it is stipulated in Article 26 of the Japanese constitution that the compulsory education is free.
If the authorities continue to provide educational activities in areas where it is already certain or predictable that the cumulative dose exceeds 1mSv annually, the petitioners (children) will face great and concrete danger of developing cancer and leukemia from radiation exposure. Life, body and health of the children will be damaged. Unless evacuation measures are taken immediately, with the government and local municipalities paying the cost, this situation cannot be resolved. It is the only way.
24 June 2011
To: Koriyama Branch, Fukushima District Court
Petitioners: 14 children who attend elementary/junior-high schools in City of Koriyama
The other party: Koriyama City Council
Purpose of this application
1 The other party must refer to the attached table of environmental radiation monitoring results and must not enforce educational activities for these petitioners in school facilities at which average radiation dose as stated in the attached table of Environmental Radiation Monitoring Results exceeds 0.2microsievert(mSv) per hour, either at 50cm or 1m above ground.
2 The other party must implement educational activities for the petitioners. This should be done using school facilities at which average radiation dose does not exceed 0.2mSv/h.
We ask Koriyama District Court to judge upon these appeals.
Reasons for the appeal
Ⅰ Concerned parties
1 Petitioners
Children from Koriyama City who are attending local elementary schools or junior-high schools.
2 The other party
Education Committee of City Council of Koriyama, which is a competent authority that is supposed to implement appropriate education for the children in the city’s elementary and junior high schools, nursery schools and kinder gardens.
Ⅱ Sequence of events
1 Location of Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant
Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant is a nuclear power plant that belongs to Tokyo Electric Power Company in City of Ookuma, Futaba-gun, Fukushima prefecture.
2 Fukushima Nuclear Accident
Following Great Northeastern Earthquake and tsunami that occurred on 11 March 2011, external power supply was lost in the reactors that had been in operation at Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant. Emergency diesel generators did not work, and the plant lost all of its power supply. As a result, the reactors and spent fuel pool lost the crucial coolant system, leading to the most deadly nuclear accident in the world history since Chernobyl. Suppression chambers were damaged in two of the reactors, followed hydrogen explosions inside the reactor buildings. As a result, massive amount of highly radioactive materials from the fuel rods began to leak into the outside environment. It has not been converged yet, still leaking this very day into the air and the sea water. Such an accident is clearly unprecedented in the world history, simply beyond Chernobyl.
3 Spreading of radioactive elements into the environment caused by the Fukushima accident
Fukushima nuclear accident has contaminated vast area of Japan, mainly Tohoku (northeastern areas of Japan) and Kanto region (the Greater Tokyo Area and seven prefectures: Gunma, Tochigi, Ibaraki, Saitama, Tokyo, Chiba, and Kanagawa) and the Pacific Ocean. Food products, tap water, sea water and soil have been seriously contaminated. The extent of the problem is just phenomenal.
4 Counter measures taken by the Japanese government
Japanese government has issued an evacuation order to areas within 20km (a concentric circle) from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant on 12 March, which was followed by “indoor evacuation order” on 15 March to areas within 30km from the plant. On 22 April, the 20km zone was declared as a “no-go zone”.
5 Counter measures taken by Japan’s Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology(MEXT)
Radioactive contamination swallowed school facilities too and for each school building and playground, it was deemed necessary to make a decision as to whether or not they could be used for educational purposes. On 19 April, Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, or MEXT, issued a notice addressed to Education Committee of Fukushima’s prefectural government, in which it was stated that if cumulative dose was predicted to be between 1 and 20 mSv per year, the facility can be used for education. This was “an interim criterion”. Then, the MEXT made an amendment on 27 May, declaring that they shall “aim to” regard 1mSv as an acceptable yearly limit for schools.
Ⅲ Rights to be protected
１ General remarks
However, annual cumulative dose since the first day of the Fukushima nuclear accident is going to be higher than 1 mSv in most of the Fukushima prefecture. Considering the health effects of radiation, the possibility for the children to suffer from radiation-induced diseases such as cancer or leukemia in the future will be quite high, if they continue to attend elementary/junior high schools, nursery schools and kinder gardens in the prefecture. For the children, moral interests are life, body and health, but all of them are now facing a serious threat.
2 Health effects of radiation
(omitted)
6.Conclusion
We have already reached a point where cumulative annual dose since the first day of Fukushima nuclear accident would exceed 1 mSv in the Fukushima prefecture. The children are of course still growing physically, with frequent cell divisions occurring inside their bodies, hence the most vulnerable. If they continue to attend elementary/junior high schools, nursery schools and kinder gardens in the Fukushima prefecture, as recommended by the MEXT, there is a possibility that they will suffer from diseases including cancer or leukemia as late radiation injury. Genetic effects can also be caused by radiation, which would then remain in the DNA for generations. It is an indisputable fact that life, body and health of the children, the most valuable moral interests, are facing a serious threat at this moment.
3 Basis for “1 mSv/Year” standard
Introduction
Scientific opinions are still divided as to what would be the acceptable annual dose limit for the public to protect their health. The MEXT claims to follow recommendations by International Commission on Radiological Protections (ICRP), which is basically 1 mSv per year.
ICRP2007 recommendations
After international criticisms mounted for some time, the ICRP admitted in the 1985 statement issued in Paris that its annual dose limit of 5 mSv, which was what they had recommended back in 1977, was too high for the public, and they lowered the limit to 1mSv. To this, Radiation Health Protection Agency of the UK made a response by recommending a stricter limit of 0.5mSv per year, reflecting the contamination caused by Sellafield nuclear fuel reprocessing plant.
Also there was Professor Alice Stewart. She was the first scientist in the world who discovered the health effects of exposure to low-level radiation. She was also the first scientific secretary of European Committee of Radiation Risk (ECRR). Prof. Stewart submitted an open letter of inquiry to the ICRP, asking for a substantial revision of the standard. But they refused it, claiming that it was satisfactory enough that they had already lowered the limit from 5 mSv to 1 mSv per year. As a result, ICRP1990 recommendation held the same limit of 1mSv, which was then inherited onto ICRP2007 recommendation. The latter was merely a slight revision of the previous recommendations.
ECRR2010 recommendations
However, European Committee of Radiation Risk (ECRR) argued in its 2010 recommendations as follows; “The total maximum permissible dose to members of the public arising from all human practices should not be more than 0.1mSv, with a value of 2 mSv for nuclear workers” (14., Executive Summary, ECRR2010). So, only a tenth of the ICRP limit. The ECRR claimed that “this would severely curtail the operation of nuclear power stations and reprocessing plants, and this reflects the Committee’s belief that nuclear power is a costly way of producing energy when human health deficits are included in the overall assessment. All new practices must be justified in such a way that the rights of all individuals are considered. Radiological exposures must be kept as low as reasonably achievable using best available technology. Finally, the environmental consequences of radioactive discharges must be assessed in relation to the total environment, including both direct and indirect effects on all living systems”. ( ibid.)
Reflecting ICRP2007 recommendation onto domestic regulations
Basic Group from the MEXT’s Radiation Committee came up with a report called “Reflecting ICRP2007 recommendations (Pub.103) onto domestic regulations (Second Intermediary Report)” on 12 January 2011, which was then approved on 28 January at its Board meeting. In this report, the Group recommended and explained that the purpose was “to rigidly follow the 1mSv rule as an annual dose limit for the members of the public”.
Domestic laws
Current Japanese domestic laws are also constituted on the basis of this 1mSv annual dose limit for the public.
4 Cumulative dose
Introduction
Since 11 March 2011, the children in the Fukushima prefecture have been continuously living in a dangerous situation where they have been receiving both types of radiation exposure; internal and external. In order to save them immediately, we shall calculate the cumulative dose by just concentrating on the external exposure. Since the internal exposure is considered to be the more dangerous than the external exposure, it should mean that the situation is indeed extremely hazardous for the children if the level of external exposure is proved to be dangerous enough on its own
.
Cumulative dose at seven elementary/junior high schools that the petitioners attend
In order to calculate the cumulative dose at seven elementary/junior high schools that the petitioners attend, we shall utilize a table called “Estimation of cumulative dose at various locations of Fukushima Prefecture” that the MEXT has made. It is based on the results of measurements that the MEXT carried out between 0600hours of 12 March 2011 and 2400hours of 25 May at Toyoda-machi, Koriyama City. This was a good basis, because all the school facilities that the petitioners attend are located within 5km distance from this geographical point. As a result, we found out that cumulative dose at this point between 12 March and 25 May 2011 (75 days) was as high as 2.9 mSv. Moreover, radiation dose at the very schools that the petitioners attend turned out to be about 1.3-2.3 times higher than that of Toyoda-machi. That means cumulative dose between 12 March and 25 May at the petitioners’ schools must have been at least 3.8 mSv (2.9 mSv×1.3) and could have been 6.67 mSv (2.9 mSv×2.3) at maximum.
Therefore, the petitioners have been exposed to cumulative dose of between 3.8mSv and 6.67mSv just for 75 days, 3.8-6.67 times over the annual exposure limit of 1mSv. That is significant, considering the fact that it was for external exposure only. And the calculation was unfairly done too, since we adopted the MEXT’s method and used “shielding coefficient” of 0.6 for wooden buildings (The MEXT seems to claim that wooden buildings have such a shielding effect against radiation).
Estimation of total cumulative dose per year
In the MEXT’s table “Estimation of cumulative dose at various locations”, there are two sets of results. One is “Cumulative dose between 12 March and 25 May” and the second is “Estimated total cumulative dose per year”. We can assume what the “Estimated total cumulative dose per year” would be by searching for the most approximate “Cumulative dose between 12 March and 25 May” on the table. So in that way, cumulative dose for a year up to 11 March 2012 at seven schools that the petitioners go to would be as much as 12.7-24mSv. That is, again, just for external exposure, and even with using the “shielding coefficient”.
Schools in the Fukushima prefecture at which cumulative dose per year would be estimated to exceed 1mSv:
At locations where average radiation dose was measured to be higher than 0.2mSv/hour between 23 and 25 May, we can assume that cumulative dose per year would certainly be higher than 1mSv. 55 out of 60 locations in Koriyama City exceeded 0.2mSv/h. Five locations in the City did not reach 0.2mSv/h, but 0.17mSv/hour was measured at three out of that five. It is highly likely that annually they would exceed 1mSv. All of 32 locations measured in Fukushima City exceeded 0.2mSv/h.
(Omitted)
Conclusion
There are 266 schools in the Fukushima prefecture. And there are 243 locations where it is assumed that the yearly cumulative dose would exceed 1mSv for certain. At 18 locations, the possibility of exceeding 1mSv/year is quite high and there are 5 locations where it is unlikely to be so.
Health effects of radiation are caused by different types of radiological exposure and can take many routes. As for the external exposure, we must not forget that radioactive materials that have fallen onto the ground must also be taken into account, apart from just looking at “dose” measured in the air. As for the internal exposure, we must note that radioactive materials can get into human body through breathing, eating and drinking.
For the children of Fukushima to be protected, all of these must be considered and the level of radiological exposure they get must stay under 1mSv annually in total. It is not easy to measure the levels of exposure in each route accurately. But obviously the level of total radiological exposure for the children will greatly exceed 1mSv if they are to receive education at school facilities within areas where the “dose” on its own is already higher than 1mSv.
Therefore, if the authorities continue to implement educational activities in areas where it is already certain or predictable that the cumulative annual dose exceeds 1mSv/year, it is clear that the children will face great danger of developing cancer and leukemia from radiation exposure. And that is only by attending these elementary/junior high schools, nursery schools and kindergarden in the region. This act seriously violates children’s moral interests; life, body and health.
Ⅶ The rights of children in the Fukushima prefecture
The right to receive education
First clause from Article 26 of Japanese constitution stipulates that “All people shall have the right to receive an equal education correspondent to their ability, as provided by law.” Then in the latter half of its second clause, “Such compulsory education shall be free”. The right to receive education naturally includes “right to receive education safely”. So it is constitutionally guaranteed that the children have the right to receive education without damages to life, body and health. This needs to be realized especially in the circumstances since Fukushima nuclear accident.
The right to life (moral interests)
Article 25 of Japanese constitution stipulates that “all people shall have the right to maintain the minimum standards of wholesome and cultured living” and “in all spheres of life, the State shall use its endeavors for the promotion and extension of social welfare and security, and of public health”. Article 13 stipulates that “All of the people shall be respected as individuals. Their right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness shall, to the extent that it does not interfere with the public welfare, be the supreme consideration in legislation and in other governmental affairs”. Therefore Japanese people naturally and clearly have the right to be protected from any damages to life, body and health that are caused by massive amount of radioactive materials released from Fukushima nuclear power plant.
Health measures at school
Article 12 of School Education Law stipulates that the providers of education must implement regular health checks and other necessary measures to protect and promote children’s health. It means that children and their parents have the right to demand implementation of appropriate health measures.
The best interests of the children
The first clause of Article 3 from Convention on the Rights of the Child is absolutely crucial for resolving this matter: “In all actions concerning children, whether undertaken by public or private social welfare institutions, courts of law, administrative authorities or legislative bodies, the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration.”
Ⅷ Duties of the other party
Duty to give safety considerations
The Japanese government, Fukushima Prefectural government and local municipalities within the Fukushima prefecture must fulfill the rights of the children that we noted so far, especially the one based on Article 26 of the Japanese constitution. They have a duty to give safety considerations and to take necessary measures so that life, body and health of the children are protected.
Since 11 March, the situation in the Fukushima prefecture is the one where great amount of radioactivity has been continuously leaking into the environment from the nearby Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. They must actively take necessary measures to prevent implementation of educational activities in the red zone, so that the children will not develop radiation-induced cancer or leukemia later. Life, body and health of the children must not be damaged.
Article 26 of School Health Safety Law stipulates that “Education providers must implement necessary measurements to fully maintain its facilities, equipment and the management system, so that children can be prevented from danger caused by any potential accidents, attacks or disasters. They must be able to deal with any potential danger or hazard caused to the children by accidents etc.”. This is clearly a reflection of the previously-mentioned “duty to give safety considerations”.
Locations of elementary and junior high schools
Regarding the locations of schools, Article 38 of School Education Law states that “local municipalities must build schools in the local areas for the children to attend”, which is of course just a general rule. It is acceptable to give educational activities outside the local areas, if it is inevitable, as written in a notice issued by the MEXT on 23 April 1959.
Even just between 12 March and 25 May 2011, cumulative dose at the petitioners’ schools reached 3.8 mSv at minimum, and 6.67 mSv at maximum, because of the massive fallout from the Fukushima nuclear power plant. The level is 3.8-6.67 times higher than the 1 mSv annual dose limit for the public, creating an extremely hazardous situation endangering life, body and health of the children.
Conclusion
It is a duty of the other party to give safety considerations and to protect life, body and health of the petitioners. Providing education in a red zone is a violation of this duty and it is totally unacceptable. They have a legal obligation to move elementary and junior high schools to outside areas immediately. And local municipalities must bear the costs, since it is stipulated in Article 26 of the Japanese constitution that the compulsory education is free.
If the authorities continue to provide educational activities in areas where it is already certain or predictable that the cumulative dose exceeds 1mSv annually, the petitioners (children) will face great and concrete danger of developing cancer and leukemia from radiation exposure. Life, body and health of the children will be damaged. Unless evacuation measures are taken immediately, with the government and local municipalities paying the cost, this situation cannot be resolved. It is the only way.
人権の最貧民国入りを表明した「日本人の仕分けの夜明け」判決（1/14 脱原発世界会議）
※あなたの評決が子どもたちを救います。まだの方は今すぐ-->こちらから
分科会「子どもの権利条約から原子力を検証する」 動画（23分後）
１、裁判を決める２つの力（その１：真理の力）
先日、或る所で次の言葉を耳にしました――福島の原発事故を経て私たちは岐路にある。
しかし、福島原発事故はちっとも「経て」いません。今なお、その真っ最中にあります。私たちは一種の核戦争の中にいるのです。日々、福島原発から放出された大量の放射性物質によって、外部から、そして体内に取り込まれ内部から、桁違いな量でくり返される核分裂と同時に発射される放射線とのたえまのない戦い（年間１ｍＳｖだけでも「毎秒1万本の放射線が体を被曝させるのが1年間続くもの」（矢ヶ崎克馬琉球大学名誉教授））を強いられているからです。「核分裂による放射線の被ばく」という、目に見えず、臭いもせず、痛みも感じない、要するに私たちの日常感覚ではぜったい理解できない相手との戦いの中にほおり込まれています。それは放射性物質（核種）からの攻撃という意味で核戦争です。
この核戦争の最大の被害者は子どもです。しかも国はその攻撃を支援しました、昨年４月、突如、それまでの一般大人の線量限度の１ｍＳｖをいきなり子どもに２０倍する２０ｍＳｖ政策を採用したからです。その政策を支援したのが国際放射線防護委員会（ＩＣＲＰ）の３月２１日の異例のお見舞い勧告でした。
しかし、「緊急時被ばく状況」や「現存被曝状況」だと、どうしてそれまでの１ｍＳｖという線量限度が突然１００倍、２０倍にアップすることが正当化できるのかその説明が全くありません。世界で最もチンプンカンプンの文書です。一体、どうやって「君たちは被ばくしたので、本日から放射能感受性が２０倍アップになりました」と子どもに説明したらいいのでしょうか。当然、福島県の親たちは猛反対しました。しかし、国は核戦争に加担するこの政策を本質的に最後まで撤回しませんでした。
そこで、差し迫った最悪の人権侵害を緊急に解決するため、昨年６月、国会・政府の人権侵害から人々を守ることを本来の職責とする「人権の最後の砦」である裁判所に、郡山の子どもたち１４名が郡山市を相手に「放射能から安全な場所で教育をせよ」を求める裁判（仮処分）を起こしました。
２、裁判を決める２つの力（その２：正義の力）
この裁判は憲法裁判です。憲法は子どもに「教育を受ける権利」を保障し（２６条）、この人権には「安全な環境で教育を受ける権利」も当然含まれるからです。当初から、私たちは門前払いがなければ「法による裁判」がなされる限りこの裁判は必ず勝つと確信していました。人権の基本原理によれば、最高の価値とされる人権に対抗して制約できるものがあるとしたら、それは唯一、同じく最高の価値を有する人権しかありません。つまり他者の人権と衝突する場合に限って人権は制限可能なのです。しかし、本件の子どもの避難で発生するのは基本的にお金の問題です。他者の人権との衝突は起きません。人権（命）対お金の対立なら人権に軍配を上げるが人権保障の当然の帰結です。
ましてや、国は１９５９年に、原発導入にあたって、原発事故による被害額を国家予算の２．２倍と試算済みです（報告書「大型原子炉の事故の理論的可能性及ぴ公衆損害に関する試算」とこれを報道した記事）。元々それだけの損害額を覚悟して原発の導入を推進したのです。現在の国家予算に当てはめれば２００兆円です。金銭的にも福島県の子どもたちの疎開を不可能だという言い訳は通用しません。
その上、本裁判は既に発生した事故の、今ここで命が危険に晒されている子どもたちを救済するという現在進行中の問題です。未来の事故防止のための原発差止裁判とはレベルがちがいます。
だから、天地がひっくり返らない限りこの裁判は負ける筈がない、そう確信していました。
３、裁判の審理
いざ裁判が始まったとき、裁判所は、門前払いをせず、被ばくの危険性という本題の審理に入りました。
申立人は、次の主張・立証をしました。
(1)、学校周辺の年間積算値が１２．７～２４ｍＳｖに達すること（報告書）、
(2)、子どもたちは、今後、チェルノブイリ事故により、郡山市と汚染度が同程度の地域（ゴメリ地区）で発生した次の健康被害が予想されること（琉球大学名誉教授矢ヶ崎克馬氏の意見書第２章）。
通常であれば、甲状腺のがん等は10万人当たり数名しか子どもには出ないのに、
(ｱ)、5～6年後から甲状腺疾病と甲状腺腫の双方が急増し、9年後の1995年には子ども10人に1人の割合で甲状腺疾病が現れた。
(ｲ)、甲状腺がんは甲状腺疾病の10%強の割合で発病、9年後は1000人中13人程度となった。
(3)、ゴメリ医科大学学長のバンダジェフスキーが、チェルノブイリ事故後に死亡した人を解剖して臓器ごとにセシウム137を測定した結果、子供たちの心臓病多発の原因がセシウム137の心臓への高濃度蓄積によるものであることを指摘し、ふくしまの子供たちも内部被ばくにより、今後、同様の心臓病多発が予想されること（医師の松井英介氏の意見書第２章）。
(4)、チェルノブイリ事故による住民避難基準に基づいて作成された郡山市中心部の「放射能汚染マップ」によれば、子どもたちが通う７つの学校全てが、住民を強制的に移住させる移住義務地域（汚染マップの赤丸）で教育を受けていること。
これに対し、子どもたちを安全な環境で教育する責任を負う郡山市は上記主張に「不知」と答えるのみで、転校の自由があるのだから危険だと思う者は自主的に引っ越せばよい、安全な場で教育を受ける権利を侵害したのは東電であって自分たちではない、だから子供たちを安全な場所に避難させる義務は負わないと反論しました（準備書面１）。しかし、「転校の自由」論とはふくしまの現実を見ない残忍酷薄な自己責任論です。
科学裁判を決定する真理の点においても、正義の点においても勝負は明らかでした。
４、裁判の結果
しかし、野田総理の「冷温停止」宣言と同じ昨年１２月１６日に、裁判所は申立の却下を宣言しました（決定）。理由の骨子は、14名の避難を求めた裁判は郡山市３万人の子ども全員を一律に避難させる裁判であると申立を強引に捻じ曲げ、従って避難が認められる要件は厳しく解するほかないとし、１００ｍＳｖ以下なら避難に必要な「切迫した危険」は認められない、文科省の２０ｍＳｖ政策も考慮すべきだ、既に被ばくしたものは今さら救済しようがない、危険だと思うなら自己責任で区域外通学という方法で避難すればよいというものでした。
これは14名の申立人と同様の危険な中にいる福島の子どもたち全員に向って、君たちは自己責任で避難しない限りどうなっても知らないぞと宣言するもの、つまり巨大な人災により歴史上初めて日本人の仕分けを宣言した未曾有の判決です。私たちはこれに服従できないのは当然です。直ちに仙台高等裁判所に異議申立する一方、命の危険にされされているふくしまの子どもたちを救うために、近代の人権宣言の原点に立ち返り、「人権の最後の砦」として機能不全に陥った裁判所に代わって、世界中の市民から構成される陪審員の手によって、放射能の危険について正しい判断を下す世界市民法廷を設置し、開催することに決めました。
世界市民法廷は真理と正義とそしていのちに対する無条件の愛を基本原理とする、21世紀の市民型紛争解決機関です。いま、日本中、世界中の人たちが誕生したばかりの世界市民法廷に参加して、「市民の、市民による、市民のための世界市民法廷」による世直しを力強く推し進めることが求められています。
(12.1.21 柳原敏夫)
分科会「子どもの権利条約から原子力を検証する」 動画（23分後）
１、裁判を決める２つの力（その１：真理の力）
先日、或る所で次の言葉を耳にしました――福島の原発事故を経て私たちは岐路にある。
しかし、福島原発事故はちっとも「経て」いません。今なお、その真っ最中にあります。私たちは一種の核戦争の中にいるのです。日々、福島原発から放出された大量の放射性物質によって、外部から、そして体内に取り込まれ内部から、桁違いな量でくり返される核分裂と同時に発射される放射線とのたえまのない戦い（年間１ｍＳｖだけでも「毎秒1万本の放射線が体を被曝させるのが1年間続くもの」（矢ヶ崎克馬琉球大学名誉教授））を強いられているからです。「核分裂による放射線の被ばく」という、目に見えず、臭いもせず、痛みも感じない、要するに私たちの日常感覚ではぜったい理解できない相手との戦いの中にほおり込まれています。それは放射性物質（核種）からの攻撃という意味で核戦争です。
この核戦争の最大の被害者は子どもです。しかも国はその攻撃を支援しました、昨年４月、突如、それまでの一般大人の線量限度の１ｍＳｖをいきなり子どもに２０倍する２０ｍＳｖ政策を採用したからです。その政策を支援したのが国際放射線防護委員会（ＩＣＲＰ）の３月２１日の異例のお見舞い勧告でした。
しかし、「緊急時被ばく状況」や「現存被曝状況」だと、どうしてそれまでの１ｍＳｖという線量限度が突然１００倍、２０倍にアップすることが正当化できるのかその説明が全くありません。世界で最もチンプンカンプンの文書です。一体、どうやって「君たちは被ばくしたので、本日から放射能感受性が２０倍アップになりました」と子どもに説明したらいいのでしょうか。当然、福島県の親たちは猛反対しました。しかし、国は核戦争に加担するこの政策を本質的に最後まで撤回しませんでした。
そこで、差し迫った最悪の人権侵害を緊急に解決するため、昨年６月、国会・政府の人権侵害から人々を守ることを本来の職責とする「人権の最後の砦」である裁判所に、郡山の子どもたち１４名が郡山市を相手に「放射能から安全な場所で教育をせよ」を求める裁判（仮処分）を起こしました。
２、裁判を決める２つの力（その２：正義の力）
この裁判は憲法裁判です。憲法は子どもに「教育を受ける権利」を保障し（２６条）、この人権には「安全な環境で教育を受ける権利」も当然含まれるからです。当初から、私たちは門前払いがなければ「法による裁判」がなされる限りこの裁判は必ず勝つと確信していました。人権の基本原理によれば、最高の価値とされる人権に対抗して制約できるものがあるとしたら、それは唯一、同じく最高の価値を有する人権しかありません。つまり他者の人権と衝突する場合に限って人権は制限可能なのです。しかし、本件の子どもの避難で発生するのは基本的にお金の問題です。他者の人権との衝突は起きません。人権（命）対お金の対立なら人権に軍配を上げるが人権保障の当然の帰結です。
ましてや、国は１９５９年に、原発導入にあたって、原発事故による被害額を国家予算の２．２倍と試算済みです（報告書「大型原子炉の事故の理論的可能性及ぴ公衆損害に関する試算」とこれを報道した記事）。元々それだけの損害額を覚悟して原発の導入を推進したのです。現在の国家予算に当てはめれば２００兆円です。金銭的にも福島県の子どもたちの疎開を不可能だという言い訳は通用しません。
その上、本裁判は既に発生した事故の、今ここで命が危険に晒されている子どもたちを救済するという現在進行中の問題です。未来の事故防止のための原発差止裁判とはレベルがちがいます。
だから、天地がひっくり返らない限りこの裁判は負ける筈がない、そう確信していました。
３、裁判の審理
いざ裁判が始まったとき、裁判所は、門前払いをせず、被ばくの危険性という本題の審理に入りました。
申立人は、次の主張・立証をしました。
(1)、学校周辺の年間積算値が１２．７～２４ｍＳｖに達すること（報告書）、
(2)、子どもたちは、今後、チェルノブイリ事故により、郡山市と汚染度が同程度の地域（ゴメリ地区）で発生した次の健康被害が予想されること（琉球大学名誉教授矢ヶ崎克馬氏の意見書第２章）。
通常であれば、甲状腺のがん等は10万人当たり数名しか子どもには出ないのに、
(ｱ)、5～6年後から甲状腺疾病と甲状腺腫の双方が急増し、9年後の1995年には子ども10人に1人の割合で甲状腺疾病が現れた。
(ｲ)、甲状腺がんは甲状腺疾病の10%強の割合で発病、9年後は1000人中13人程度となった。
(3)、ゴメリ医科大学学長のバンダジェフスキーが、チェルノブイリ事故後に死亡した人を解剖して臓器ごとにセシウム137を測定した結果、子供たちの心臓病多発の原因がセシウム137の心臓への高濃度蓄積によるものであることを指摘し、ふくしまの子供たちも内部被ばくにより、今後、同様の心臓病多発が予想されること（医師の松井英介氏の意見書第２章）。
(4)、チェルノブイリ事故による住民避難基準に基づいて作成された郡山市中心部の「放射能汚染マップ」によれば、子どもたちが通う７つの学校全てが、住民を強制的に移住させる移住義務地域（汚染マップの赤丸）で教育を受けていること。
これに対し、子どもたちを安全な環境で教育する責任を負う郡山市は上記主張に「不知」と答えるのみで、転校の自由があるのだから危険だと思う者は自主的に引っ越せばよい、安全な場で教育を受ける権利を侵害したのは東電であって自分たちではない、だから子供たちを安全な場所に避難させる義務は負わないと反論しました（準備書面１）。しかし、「転校の自由」論とはふくしまの現実を見ない残忍酷薄な自己責任論です。
科学裁判を決定する真理の点においても、正義の点においても勝負は明らかでした。
４、裁判の結果
しかし、野田総理の「冷温停止」宣言と同じ昨年１２月１６日に、裁判所は申立の却下を宣言しました（決定）。理由の骨子は、14名の避難を求めた裁判は郡山市３万人の子ども全員を一律に避難させる裁判であると申立を強引に捻じ曲げ、従って避難が認められる要件は厳しく解するほかないとし、１００ｍＳｖ以下なら避難に必要な「切迫した危険」は認められない、文科省の２０ｍＳｖ政策も考慮すべきだ、既に被ばくしたものは今さら救済しようがない、危険だと思うなら自己責任で区域外通学という方法で避難すればよいというものでした。
これは14名の申立人と同様の危険な中にいる福島の子どもたち全員に向って、君たちは自己責任で避難しない限りどうなっても知らないぞと宣言するもの、つまり巨大な人災により歴史上初めて日本人の仕分けを宣言した未曾有の判決です。私たちはこれに服従できないのは当然です。直ちに仙台高等裁判所に異議申立する一方、命の危険にされされているふくしまの子どもたちを救うために、近代の人権宣言の原点に立ち返り、「人権の最後の砦」として機能不全に陥った裁判所に代わって、世界中の市民から構成される陪審員の手によって、放射能の危険について正しい判断を下す世界市民法廷を設置し、開催することに決めました。
世界市民法廷は真理と正義とそしていのちに対する無条件の愛を基本原理とする、21世紀の市民型紛争解決機関です。いま、日本中、世界中の人たちが誕生したばかりの世界市民法廷に参加して、「市民の、市民による、市民のための世界市民法廷」による世直しを力強く推し進めることが求められています。
(12.1.21 柳原敏夫)
Просьба поддержать: скажем «НЕТ» решению, нарушающему права человека! Скажем «ДА!» созданию Всемирного гражданского трибунала по вопросу массовой эвакуации из Фукусима, дающего справедливую оценку уровню радиационной угрозы
«Мы – 100 %.» – 14 школьников из города Корияма префектуры Фукусима, учимся в районе, уровень загрязнения которого сопоставим с зоной обязательной эвакуации по чернобыльскому стандарту (см. на карту ниже).
Государственная власть (Министерство образования, культуры, спорта, науки и технологии) – виновник нынешней катастрофы или «Люди 0 %» – представила свою позицию, что их не беспокоит угроза жизни ни в чем не повинных детей Фукусима. У них нет ни чувства вины, ни ответственности за образование, что не возможно понять здравым умом.
«Мы – 100%» не могли оставить без внимания акт беспрецедентной несправедливости, и 24 июня 2011 г. возбудили судебный процесс (заявление об условном взыскании), требуя обеспечения безопасности и образования детей у суда, последнего оплота прав человека.
Суд принял данное заявление к рассмотрению, и приступил к изучению возможных последствий облучения на здоровье детей. Истцы доказывали следующее с помощью открытых писем экспертов:
1. Позволить детям проживать и продолжать обучение в районе с годовой дозой радиационного фона 1 мЗв и более противоречит конституционной обязанности обеспечить прохождение детьми обучения в безопасных условиях.
2. Радиационный фон в школах в данном районе достигает даже при скромном расчете 12, 7 – 24 мЗв в год (только внешнее облучение).
3. В дальнейшем и в городе Корияма также ожидается серьезная угроза здоровью жителей, как возникла в чернобыльских районах с подобным уровнем радиационного загрязнения.
Суд, однако, через 45 дней молчания после окончания рассмотрения в конце октября, 16 декабря 2011 г. (в день, когда премьер-министр Нода объявил о завершении холодной остановки реакторов Фукусима-I) принял решение об отказе в эвакуации, отклонив заявление детей. Это решение не оправдало надежду детей через судебный процесс, и дало официальное одобрение ужасающему нарушению прав человека государством и муниципалитетом - виновниками аварии.
Не в коем случае нельзя допустить и смириться с подобным решением, которое навечно оставит черное пятно в истории человека.
Итак, мы выдвигаем следующие два обращения.
Обращение 1:
Жители Японии и всего мира, давайте скажем «НЕТ» этому решению, покажем ошибку этого решения и исправим её своими гражданскими силами.
Обращение 2:
Мы решили заменить суд, лишившийся своей функции из-за самоубийства судебной системы, организуя «Всемирный гражданский трибунал», состоящий из присяжных со всего мира. Цель создания трибунала – правильно оценить опасность радиации и спасти детей Фукусима. Всемирный гражданский трибунал – орган решения конфликта гражданского типа XXI века, основным принципом которого являются истина, справедливость и безоговорочная любовь к жизни. Граждане Японии и всего мира, скажем «ДA» рождению этого нового трибунала, поддержим реализацию лучшего общества через «трибунал граждан, избранный гражданами и для граждан».
※ Чтобы выразить свою поддержку, достаточно только сделать отметку в квадрате.
※ Просим выразить свою поддержку и тех, кто уже давал подпись, так как это разные процедуры.
※ Выразить свое решение о поддержке можно только через компьютер.
Щелкнуть для увеличения
Государственная власть (Министерство образования, культуры, спорта, науки и технологии) – виновник нынешней катастрофы или «Люди 0 %» – представила свою позицию, что их не беспокоит угроза жизни ни в чем не повинных детей Фукусима. У них нет ни чувства вины, ни ответственности за образование, что не возможно понять здравым умом.
«Мы – 100%» не могли оставить без внимания акт беспрецедентной несправедливости, и 24 июня 2011 г. возбудили судебный процесс (заявление об условном взыскании), требуя обеспечения безопасности и образования детей у суда, последнего оплота прав человека.
Суд принял данное заявление к рассмотрению, и приступил к изучению возможных последствий облучения на здоровье детей. Истцы доказывали следующее с помощью открытых писем экспертов:
1. Позволить детям проживать и продолжать обучение в районе с годовой дозой радиационного фона 1 мЗв и более противоречит конституционной обязанности обеспечить прохождение детьми обучения в безопасных условиях.
2. Радиационный фон в школах в данном районе достигает даже при скромном расчете 12, 7 – 24 мЗв в год (только внешнее облучение).
3. В дальнейшем и в городе Корияма также ожидается серьезная угроза здоровью жителей, как возникла в чернобыльских районах с подобным уровнем радиационного загрязнения.
Суд, однако, через 45 дней молчания после окончания рассмотрения в конце октября, 16 декабря 2011 г. (в день, когда премьер-министр Нода объявил о завершении холодной остановки реакторов Фукусима-I) принял решение об отказе в эвакуации, отклонив заявление детей. Это решение не оправдало надежду детей через судебный процесс, и дало официальное одобрение ужасающему нарушению прав человека государством и муниципалитетом - виновниками аварии.
Не в коем случае нельзя допустить и смириться с подобным решением, которое навечно оставит черное пятно в истории человека.
Итак, мы выдвигаем следующие два обращения.
Обращение 1:
Жители Японии и всего мира, давайте скажем «НЕТ» этому решению, покажем ошибку этого решения и исправим её своими гражданскими силами.
Обращение 2:
Мы решили заменить суд, лишившийся своей функции из-за самоубийства судебной системы, организуя «Всемирный гражданский трибунал», состоящий из присяжных со всего мира. Цель создания трибунала – правильно оценить опасность радиации и спасти детей Фукусима. Всемирный гражданский трибунал – орган решения конфликта гражданского типа XXI века, основным принципом которого являются истина, справедливость и безоговорочная любовь к жизни. Граждане Японии и всего мира, скажем «ДA» рождению этого нового трибунала, поддержим реализацию лучшего общества через «трибунал граждан, избранный гражданами и для граждан».
※ Чтобы выразить свою поддержку, достаточно только сделать отметку в квадрате.
※ Просим выразить свою поддержку и тех, кто уже давал подпись, так как это разные процедуры.
※ Выразить свое решение о поддержке можно только через компьютер.
请给出您的赞同：对人权侵害的决定说NO！对即将开庭的正确判断核辐射危险性的「福岛集团疏散判决」世界市民法庭说YES！
「我们是100%」去年3月11日福岛第一核电站事故中，仍在切尔诺贝利核电站的避难基准中的强制避难区域里接受教育的福岛县郡山市的14名儿童。
（以下是受污染区域的地图）
作为核电站爆炸事故的始作俑者的国家（文部科学省）「0%的人」，却对把不相关的福岛的孩子们的性命放置于危险之中的行为毫不反省自问，制定出了即没有加害者的认知也没有教育责任者的认知，超乎常理的方针政策。
「我们是100%」对此闻所未闻的不正义之事不能保持沉默，去年6月24日，在「人权最后的堡垒」法院里发起了「让孩子们在安全的环境里受教育」和请求救援的审判（临时申诉处分）。
法院并没有因为先例而闭门不见，对被（放射线）照射的孩子们的健康情况，有无受害的可能进行了实体审理，专家的意见书证明了申诉人的以下情况
①．让孩子们在空间放射线量率年间1mSv以上的地方受教育是违反宪法「让孩子在安全的环境中受教育的义务」，
②．上学的小中学校，单是外部被（放射线）照射一项，保守估计的空间放射线量率年间也达到了１２．７～２４mSv。
③．在切尔诺贝利与郡山市同程度的核辐射污染区域里发生的深度健康伤害，在今后的郡山市也能预想到。
但是，法院在10月末审理完之后的45天沉默期内，与野田首相的「冷温停止」
声明一样，12月16日，驳回了孩子们的申诉，发表了「避难停止」声明（决定）。这个决定，是对期望审判能带来社会变革的孩子们的背叛，给制造核电站爆炸事故的始作俑者的国家和自治团体的这种凶狠的人权侵害行为带来了保障，是最可恶的人权侵害行为。我们绝对不能容忍此种给孩子们的人权侵害史上留下永远的污点的行为。
因此，我们号召以下的2点呼吁赞同
【呼吁赞同１】
现在，全日本，全世界的人们请对此种人权侵害说NO！向世人显示这个决定是错误的，让我们市民用自己的手来纠正错误吧。
【呼吁赞同2】
由于法院陷在司法自杀似的机能不全，为了拯救陷入生命危急的福岛的孩子们，由世界各地的市民组成的陪审团成员的手，设置了正确判断核辐射危险性的世界市民法庭，决定开庭审理本次判决。世界市民法庭是以真理和正义以及对生命的无条件的爱为基本原理，解决21世纪的市民型纷争的机构。现在，全日本，全世界的人们都对这种新型的世界市民法庭的诞生说YES！通过向世人表明支持世界市民法庭，让我们强力支持由「市民的，来自于市民，服务于市民的世界市民法庭」带来社会的改革吧！
※只要点击选择赞同就可以。不需要做其它的事情。
※赞同与签名不同，如果已经签名的朋友也请表明您的赞同意愿。
※不能使用手机表明您的赞同意愿，请使用电脑。
（以下是受污染区域的地图）
点击放大
作为核电站爆炸事故的始作俑者的国家（文部科学省）「0%的人」，却对把不相关的福岛的孩子们的性命放置于危险之中的行为毫不反省自问，制定出了即没有加害者的认知也没有教育责任者的认知，超乎常理的方针政策。
「我们是100%」对此闻所未闻的不正义之事不能保持沉默，去年6月24日，在「人权最后的堡垒」法院里发起了「让孩子们在安全的环境里受教育」和请求救援的审判（临时申诉处分）。
法院并没有因为先例而闭门不见，对被（放射线）照射的孩子们的健康情况，有无受害的可能进行了实体审理，专家的意见书证明了申诉人的以下情况
①．让孩子们在空间放射线量率年间1mSv以上的地方受教育是违反宪法「让孩子在安全的环境中受教育的义务」，
②．上学的小中学校，单是外部被（放射线）照射一项，保守估计的空间放射线量率年间也达到了１２．７～２４mSv。
③．在切尔诺贝利与郡山市同程度的核辐射污染区域里发生的深度健康伤害，在今后的郡山市也能预想到。
但是，法院在10月末审理完之后的45天沉默期内，与野田首相的「冷温停止」
声明一样，12月16日，驳回了孩子们的申诉，发表了「避难停止」声明（决定）。这个决定，是对期望审判能带来社会变革的孩子们的背叛，给制造核电站爆炸事故的始作俑者的国家和自治团体的这种凶狠的人权侵害行为带来了保障，是最可恶的人权侵害行为。我们绝对不能容忍此种给孩子们的人权侵害史上留下永远的污点的行为。
因此，我们号召以下的2点呼吁赞同
【呼吁赞同１】
现在，全日本，全世界的人们请对此种人权侵害说NO！向世人显示这个决定是错误的，让我们市民用自己的手来纠正错误吧。
【呼吁赞同2】
由于法院陷在司法自杀似的机能不全，为了拯救陷入生命危急的福岛的孩子们，由世界各地的市民组成的陪审团成员的手，设置了正确判断核辐射危险性的世界市民法庭，决定开庭审理本次判决。世界市民法庭是以真理和正义以及对生命的无条件的爱为基本原理，解决21世纪的市民型纷争的机构。现在，全日本，全世界的人们都对这种新型的世界市民法庭的诞生说YES！通过向世人表明支持世界市民法庭，让我们强力支持由「市民的，来自于市民，服务于市民的世界市民法庭」带来社会的改革吧！
※只要点击选择赞同就可以。不需要做其它的事情。
※赞同与签名不同，如果已经签名的朋友也请表明您的赞同意愿。
※不能使用手机表明您的赞同意愿，请使用电脑。
찬동 의뢰:인권침해 결정에 NO를! 방사능 위험에 대해 바른 판단을 내리는 「후쿠시마 집단소개(疎開,피난)재판」세계시민법정 개최에 YES를!
「우리는 100%」 작년 3월11일 후쿠시마(福島) 제1원전사고로 인해 체르노빌 피난 기준으로 강제피난지역에서 교육을 받고 있는 후쿠시마현 고오리야마시(郡山市)의 14명 어린이입니다(이하의 오염 지도 참조).
이 원전사고의 가해자인 정부(문부과학성) 즉,「0%의 사람들」은 아무런 책임도 없는 후쿠시마현의 어린이들의 목숨을 위험한 상태에 방치한 채 반성도, 가해자라는 자각도, 교육 행정책임자라는 자각도 없는 보통 사람으로서는 믿을 수 없는 방침을 내세웠습니다.
「우리는 100%」는 이 전대미문의 정의롭지 못함에 가만히 있을 수 없어 작년 6월24일 「인권 최후의 보루」인 재판소에 「어린이들을 안전한 장소에서 교육해라」는 구제를 요구하는 재판(가처분 주장)을 일으켰습니다.
재판소는 전례가 없는 재판이라는 점에서 그냥 거절하지 않고, 피폭으로 의한 어린이들의 건강피해 가능성의 유무에 대해서 실체심리에 들어가, 주장인은
①. 어린이들을 공간선량 연간 1mSv이상인 지역에서 교육시키는 것은 헌법에 근거한「어린이들을 안전한 환경에서 교육하는 의무」를 위반하는 것,
②. 통학하는 초중등학교는, 외부피폭만으로 적게 계산해도 공간선량이 연간 12.7∼24mSv에 달하는 것,
③. 체르노빌에서 고오리야마시(郡山市)와 방사능 오염도가 비슷한 지역에서 발생한 심각한 건강피해가 앞으로 고오리야마시(郡山市)에서도 예상될 것
을 전문가의 의견서 등으로 증명했습니다.
그러나 재판소는, 10월말 심리종료로부터 45일의 침묵 후, 노다(野田) 총리의 「냉온정지」선언과 같은 날인 12월16일, 어린이들의 주장을 각하하는 「피난정지」를 선언(결정)했습니다. 이 결정은 재판에 의한 사회개혁이라는 어린이들의 기대에 어긋나고, 원전사고의 가해자인 정부와 자치체에 의한 흉악한 인권침해행위를 보장을 준 최악의 인권침해행위입니다. 어린이들에 대한 인권침해의 역사에 있어서 영원한 오점을 남기는 이 결정을 절대로 용서할 수 없습니다.
그래서 우리는 이하 2개의 찬동어필을 호소합니다.
【찬동 어필1】
지금 전일본, 전세계 사람들이 이 인권침해의 결정에 대해 NO!를 표명하고, 이 결정이 잘못된 것임을 세상에 밝히고 우리 시민의 손으로 잘못을 바로잡아 갑시다.
【찬동 어필2】
사법의 자살로 기능부전에 빠진 재판소 대신하여 생명의 위험한 상태로 놓여 있는 후쿠시마의 어린이들을 구하기 위해 전세계의 시민들로 구성된 배심원의 손으로 방사능의 위험에 대해 바른 판단을 내리는 세계시민법정을 설치, 개최하기로 정했습니다. 세계시민법정은 진리와 정의, 그리고 생명에 대한 무조건적인 사랑을 기본원리로 하는 21세기 시민형 분쟁해결기관입니다. 지금 전일본, 전세계 사람들이 이 새로운 세계시민법정의 탄생에 대해 YES!라고 표명하고, 이것을 지지하고 있음을 세상에 밝히며 「시민의, 시민에 의한, 시민을 위한 세계시민법정」에 의한 사회개혁을 강력하게 지지합시다.
※찬동표명은 □ 체크만으로 OK. 그 이상 필요 없습니다.
※찬동은 서명과 다르므로, 이미 서명한 분도 찬동표명을 부탁드립니다.
※휴대폰으로는 찬동표명할 수 없습니다. PC로 해 주시기 바랍니다.
클릭하여 확대
이 원전사고의 가해자인 정부(문부과학성) 즉,「0%의 사람들」은 아무런 책임도 없는 후쿠시마현의 어린이들의 목숨을 위험한 상태에 방치한 채 반성도, 가해자라는 자각도, 교육 행정책임자라는 자각도 없는 보통 사람으로서는 믿을 수 없는 방침을 내세웠습니다.
「우리는 100%」는 이 전대미문의 정의롭지 못함에 가만히 있을 수 없어 작년 6월24일 「인권 최후의 보루」인 재판소에 「어린이들을 안전한 장소에서 교육해라」는 구제를 요구하는 재판(가처분 주장)을 일으켰습니다.
재판소는 전례가 없는 재판이라는 점에서 그냥 거절하지 않고, 피폭으로 의한 어린이들의 건강피해 가능성의 유무에 대해서 실체심리에 들어가, 주장인은
①. 어린이들을 공간선량 연간 1mSv이상인 지역에서 교육시키는 것은 헌법에 근거한「어린이들을 안전한 환경에서 교육하는 의무」를 위반하는 것,
②. 통학하는 초중등학교는, 외부피폭만으로 적게 계산해도 공간선량이 연간 12.7∼24mSv에 달하는 것,
③. 체르노빌에서 고오리야마시(郡山市)와 방사능 오염도가 비슷한 지역에서 발생한 심각한 건강피해가 앞으로 고오리야마시(郡山市)에서도 예상될 것
을 전문가의 의견서 등으로 증명했습니다.
그러나 재판소는, 10월말 심리종료로부터 45일의 침묵 후, 노다(野田) 총리의 「냉온정지」선언과 같은 날인 12월16일, 어린이들의 주장을 각하하는 「피난정지」를 선언(결정)했습니다. 이 결정은 재판에 의한 사회개혁이라는 어린이들의 기대에 어긋나고, 원전사고의 가해자인 정부와 자치체에 의한 흉악한 인권침해행위를 보장을 준 최악의 인권침해행위입니다. 어린이들에 대한 인권침해의 역사에 있어서 영원한 오점을 남기는 이 결정을 절대로 용서할 수 없습니다.
그래서 우리는 이하 2개의 찬동어필을 호소합니다.
【찬동 어필1】
지금 전일본, 전세계 사람들이 이 인권침해의 결정에 대해 NO!를 표명하고, 이 결정이 잘못된 것임을 세상에 밝히고 우리 시민의 손으로 잘못을 바로잡아 갑시다.
【찬동 어필2】
사법의 자살로 기능부전에 빠진 재판소 대신하여 생명의 위험한 상태로 놓여 있는 후쿠시마의 어린이들을 구하기 위해 전세계의 시민들로 구성된 배심원의 손으로 방사능의 위험에 대해 바른 판단을 내리는 세계시민법정을 설치, 개최하기로 정했습니다. 세계시민법정은 진리와 정의, 그리고 생명에 대한 무조건적인 사랑을 기본원리로 하는 21세기 시민형 분쟁해결기관입니다. 지금 전일본, 전세계 사람들이 이 새로운 세계시민법정의 탄생에 대해 YES!라고 표명하고, 이것을 지지하고 있음을 세상에 밝히며 「시민의, 시민에 의한, 시민을 위한 세계시민법정」에 의한 사회개혁을 강력하게 지지합시다.
※찬동표명은 □ 체크만으로 OK. 그 이상 필요 없습니다.
※찬동은 서명과 다르므로, 이미 서명한 분도 찬동표명을 부탁드립니다.
※휴대폰으로는 찬동표명할 수 없습니다. PC로 해 주시기 바랍니다.
クリス・バズビー博士によるＣＢＦＣＦ（福島の子どもたちのためのクリストファー・バズビー・ファンデーション）およびジェームス・ライアン氏との関係絶縁声明について
２０１２年１月１２日
ふくしま集団疎開裁判の会
クリス・バズビー博士は、２０１１年１２月１２日以降、ジェームス・ライアン氏およびＣＢＦＣＦとは一切関係がない、と言明しました。
ふくしま集団疎開裁判の会は２０１１年７月、バズビー博士を招請し、東京、松戸、会津若松において東京電力福島第一原発事故と内部被ばくについての講演会を開催しました。その後９月ごろ、ジェームス・ライアン氏によるＣＢＦＣＦなるサイト（http://www.cbfcf.org/）が開設されました。ＣＢＦＣＦは、現在閉鎖状態のバズビー研究所なるサイトとともに、高額の放射能検査とサプリメントの販売を行っていました。これについて私たちは、このＣＢＦＣＦは実在するものではない、との【ご注意】を会のブログに掲載しました。
私たちはまた、クリス・バズビー博士に対して、ＣＢＦＣＦの日本語サイトの内容を連絡するとともに、いかなる関係であるかを明確にするように要請してきました。
クリス・バズビー博士は２０１２年１月９日、ジェームス・ライアン氏とＣＢＦＣＦには一切関知せず、また、お金の授受もないと言明しました。また、２０１１年１２月１２日に正式に関係を絶ったことも確認しました。
Jan 9th 2012
To whom it may concern
The Christopher Busby Foundation for the Children of Fukushima CBFCF.
This is to confirm that I wrote to Mr James Ryan, the CEO and organizer of the CBFCF on 12th December and formally broke any links I had with his CBFCF organization in so far as it exists. This is because the organisation never developed as was originally promised and never carried out the work that had been agreed in a way that had been agreed between me and Mr Ryan. I confirm that I have never agreed to any of the information and details posted on the website of the CBFCF and have never received any money from the CBFCF. My advice has only to be that people exposed to radionuclides from Fukushima in the radioactive areas of north Japan should take Calcium and Magnesium supplements, nothing else which has been marketed by Mr Ryan, and this advice I continue to give.
Chris Busby
（訳）
２０１２年１月９日
関係者各位
これは、１２月１２日ＣＢＦＣＦの代表責任者であり創始者のジェームス・ライアン氏に私が手紙を書き、現在存在する限りの、私が持っている彼のＣＢＦＣＦとの関係をすべて正式に断ったことを確認するものです。これは、この組織が当初の約束通りに設立されることなく、また私とライアン氏とで同意したかたちで仕事を行ったことがまったくなかったからです。私は確認しますが、私がＣＢＦＣＦのウェブサイトに書いてあるいかなる情報も詳細も認知したことはまったくなく、ＣＢＦＣＦからお金をもらったことはまったくありません。私のアドバイスは、福島からの放射線核種によって被曝している北日本の放射線汚染地域の人々にカルシウムとマグネシウムのサプリを飲むとよいでしょう、というものに過ぎず、ライアン氏によって販売されているものとはまったく関係ありません。このアドバイスを私は続けていくつもりです。
クリス・バズビー
To whom it may concern
The Christopher Busby Foundation for the Children of Fukushima CBFCF.
Mr James Ryan
This is to confirm that I wrote to Mr James Ryan, the CEO and organizer of the CBFCF on 12th December and formally broke any links I had with his CBFCF organization in so far as it exists. This is because the organisation never developed as was originally promised and never carried out the work that had been agreed in a way that had been agreed between me and Mr Ryan. I confirm that I have never agreed to any of the information and details posted on the website of the CBFCF and have never received any money from the CBFCF. My advice has only to be that people exposed to radionuclides from Fukushima in the radioactive areas of north Japan should take Calcium and Magnesium supplements, nothing else which has been marketed by Mr Ryan, and this advice I continue to give.
Chris Busby
（訳）
２０１２年１月９日
関係者各位
福島の子どもたちのためのクリストファー・バズビー・ファンデーション（CBFCF）および、ジェームス・ライアン氏について
これは、１２月１２日ＣＢＦＣＦの代表責任者であり創始者のジェームス・ライアン氏に私が手紙を書き、現在存在する限りの、私が持っている彼のＣＢＦＣＦとの関係をすべて正式に断ったことを確認するものです。これは、この組織が当初の約束通りに設立されることなく、また私とライアン氏とで同意したかたちで仕事を行ったことがまったくなかったからです。私は確認しますが、私がＣＢＦＣＦのウェブサイトに書いてあるいかなる情報も詳細も認知したことはまったくなく、ＣＢＦＣＦからお金をもらったことはまったくありません。私のアドバイスは、福島からの放射線核種によって被曝している北日本の放射線汚染地域の人々にカルシウムとマグネシウムのサプリを飲むとよいでしょう、というものに過ぎず、ライアン氏によって販売されているものとはまったく関係ありません。このアドバイスを私は続けていくつもりです。
クリス・バズビー
Announcement by The "Fukushima Evacuate Children Lawsuit Group". Twelve angry citizens decide to hold an "International Citizens' Tribunal" to save the children in Fukushima as their lives are at urgent risk.
Japanese version
1 . What has in fact happened since 3.11 as well as the condition of the children in Fukushima up to the court filing on June 24th, 2011.
Running through the wind, with their cheeks red, mouthfuls of raspberries, filled with the excitement, catching insects, rolling over the snow fields… Those were the children of Fukushima.
The massive accident on 3.11 at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant has completely changed Fukushima prefecture. In Koriyama where the14 children who are the plaintiffs in the lawsuit live, many of the citizens were exposed to the invisible radiation from the damaged power plants. After the accident no iodine tablets were distributed and no announcements of radiation levels were made.
One father without knowing the imminent danger had his son stand in line to get their ration of water from a water truck. One high school girl was outside everyday participating in after-school track and field activities. One mother brought her daughter back to Fukushima from her safe haven far from Fukushima as she had been instructed that her daughter had to attend her school graduation ceremony.
The citizens later learned that much of the safety information, including the data from the Japanese SPEED 1 Radiation Plume Monitoring System was intentionally hidden so the people in the surrounding regions had no idea as to the actual danger they faced.
At the same time the accidents themselves were trivialized by the Ministry of Education and Science backed "Safe Campaign" that raised the internationally accepted 1 mSv/y exposure standard to 20 mSv/y. At the same time the Japanese government raised other safety standards beyond levels that are internationally agreed upon.
With much anxiety and fear the parents have made desperate efforts to protect their children but the only measure that the government has taken to ensure the safety of their children and health has been a basic cleanup of the radioactive fallout, that in reality, has not significantly lowered the exposure levels.
To adequately ensure their safety and health, the only option the children had and still have is voluntary evacuation, as Koriyama has not been designated as an evacuation zone. Voluntary evacuation naturally would mean the children would have to leave their family and friends and move to an unknown world. Some families with the financial resources have sent their children to other locations. However, for the parents of these 14 children, such an option was and is not financially possible.
For these compelling reasons and more, the 14 children became the petitioners who filed "Fukushima Evacuate Children Lawsuit".
2. Reason of the pleading and its significance
(1) Why did we file the Pleading?
The Education Ministry, in response to the massive outcries of the parents in Fukushima, corrected their earlier standard that had allowed school activities in Fukushima to continue within radiation levels up to 20 mSv/year. Finally they agreed with the parents that 1 mSv/year should be the maximum level that children be allowed to be exposed to.
After checks were carried out almost all the schools in Fukushima prefecture were found to be contaminated with levels greater than 1 mSv/year. What is even more shocking, the central areas of Koriyama, where the plaintiffs live, were found to be extremely dangerous, with levels of 5 mSv/year or more. Under the Chernobyl Evacuation Standard (more than 5 mSv/year) the whole area would have been considered a mandatory evacuation area. In other words, had this been Russia, the government would have forced all the people to move to safer locations. (See the Contamination Map)
In spite of the strong demands from hundreds of parents neither the Ministry of Education nor the local government showed any intent to actually move the children to safe locations.
The world must be clear about one thing. The Japanese government is completely responsible for the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant accident and thus for the irreparable damage they are causing to the children and citizens affected by the radiation. Though they are 100% responsible, they have not taken the steps they are obligated to take to save the children whose lives and health they have knowingly put at risk.
This irresponsible behavior by the Japanese government is an unprecedented violation of human rights, and as its implications are so serious we feel it should be considered a "crime against humanity" under international law.
The original purpose of the court system was and is to provide citizens with a way to remedy grievances and violations of their intrinsic rights. As the state and local governments have ignored the outcries of the citizens in their suffering, we decided to use the court system to achieve the outcome the children deserve.
In this case we want to bring justice to the members of the government that have and continue to cause irreparable damage to all the children remaining in Fukushima.
We filed our case, the "Fukushima Evacuate Children Lawsuit" on June 24, 2011. In it 14 elementary/middle school children from Koriyama filed a provisional disposition against the city of Koriyama, arguing that "the children should have the right to education in a safe place".
(2) Significance of the Pleading
This pleading is ultimately purposed so that all the children whose lives and health are at risk as a result of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant accident can get their education in a safe environment. As it would be impossible under the current judicial system for the government to implement such a measure immediately, it was necessary to provide a precedent. Thus we put together our lawsuit with the 14 school children.
It was our plan that if our initial case was approved, we would move forward to achieve the same outcome for all the school children in Fukushima that are currently in this dangerous situation. Based on the court order that the 14 children must be evacuated, as it is their right to receive their education in a safe environment, negotiations between the citizens and the government would begin for the rest of the children. In that sense, the 14 children filed the suit on behalf of all the children in Fukushima.
3. Development of the Trial
As this evacuation lawsuit was unprecedented, we initially were concerned that our pleading might be dismissed at submission, but the court accepted our pleading and thus it became a legal and binding case.
The hearings for trial were expected to be completed on September 9, 2011 with both parties giving their concluding remarks. On that day however, we submitted new evidence that was disclosed by the Ministry of Education in late August. This evidence from the government included cesium soil contamination data for Koriyama. This made it possible for us for the first time to compare the radiation levels between Koriyama City and the surrounding areas of Chernobyl where radioactive fallout had polluted the environment.
We also included a document by Ryukyu University Prof Emeritus Katsuma Yagasaki who compared Koriyama City with the Lugyny (Luginy) region in Ukraine, where the level of cesium pollution is similar to that in Koriyama. Prof Yagasaki concluded that if the children in Koriyama remain where they are, the same health effects will be expected for them as reported in Lugyny (Luginy) after the Chernobyl accident.
To our shock Koriyama City refused to discuss this comparison with Lugyny (Luginy), ignoring our submission, stating that this issue was "unknown". In other words, they examined the evidence but refused to discuss it.
They then stated that those who feel that it is a health risk to remain in Koriyama are free to move if they want, as all students have the right to change schools. Finally they said that it was TEPCO, not Koriyama City, who infringed upon the right of students to get an education in safe place, therefore, it was not the duty of Koriyama City to evacuate the children to safe areas.
With these words Koriyama City openly and officially declared that they are not responsible for their citizens and thus violated the basic human rights of the citizens they are responsible for.
After this statement in the court by Koriyama City, we decided to do everything in our power to gather as much evidence from the Chernobyl accident as we could so that deeper and more detailed comparisons could be made with Koriyama City. The court and the citizens of Koriyama have a right to know what the expected health consequences will be if they remain in Koriyama.
Thus we needed more time to gather evidence, so the trial was extended to the end of October.
4. 12/16 Conclusion of Court Decision and its grounds
An urgent provisional disposition was requested for the case. However, the Koriyama court took their time to arrive at their ruling which was finally announced on December 16th, exactly 45 days after the conclusion of examination. It fell, rather coincidently, on the same day that Prime Minister Noda publicly announced that the Fukushima Daiichi reactors were now in a "Cold Shut Down Condition". The Koriyama district court dismissed the pleading of the plaintiffs, the14 school children in Koriyama.
The court said that the primary reason for their decision is that it felt the 14 children were in fact demanding the exclusive mandatory evacuation of all elementary/middle school students in the region. (The number is estimated to be 300,000.) The court said that such a large-scale evacuation would require concrete evidence proving that there is an immediate risk to the lives and physical health of the 14 plaintiffs. The court claims that their basis for evacuation would be only if levels in the air in the area where the children live were to be found to be more than 100mSv/year. The court went on to claim that there is no evidence of such levels in the air.
On the fact that the levels are not above 100mSv/year, the plaintiffs agree.
This 100mSv/year that the judge adopted however, is not the internationally accepted safety level. The court has not revealed the scientific grounds for their decision to use 100mSv/year as their evacuation standard.
There is currently no internationally accepted evacuation standard. The internationally accepted safety standard is 1mSv/year.
In any area that has a level of more than 1mSv/year, people are advised that there is no immediate risk to their health. They are not required by law to evacuate, but it is generally considered not healthy to be exposed to such a level for an extended amount of time.
In the case of the Chernobyl accident, the Russian government evacuated all citizens from areas contaminated with 5mSv/year or higher.
The chief judge Hibiki Shimizu in his ruling, did not mention or refer to any of the evidence we submitted in this matter. Specifically, we prepared a comparison between the radiation levels measured in Chernobyl and the levels in Koriyama City at the time of submission. Our evidence clearly shows that the levels in Koriyama City would have warranted the Russian government to designate the area as a mandatory evacuation zone.
In our submission and during the court proceedings that went on for several months prior to the judgment, the court did not make a single reference to the 100mSv /year safety standard that the court based its final decision on. In the modern judiciary system, a judgment must be based on evidence submitted and discussed by both parties. As there was no such discussion in this case, the courts ruling cannot be considered fair nor can it be considered legal.
The court has thus trampled upon the very principles of the modern judicial system that is meant to be the "Last Fortress of Human Rights".
5. Actions to correct the injustice of the court decision in order to save the children of Fukushima, whose lives and health are at risk
The conclusions reached by the court demonstrate that the judicial system in Japan has lost its integrity and can no longer be relied upon to deliver fair and just judgments. It is clear that the judicial system in Japan is no longer the “Last Fortress of Human Rights” that it was designed to be. It has committed a serious crime that gives its seal of approval to the state and local governments’ violations of human rights.
These violations have put the lives and health of the children living in Fukushima at risk, a risk that is not only serious but also unwarranted. Our duty as adults is to protect children from dangerous situations, especially those that can be avoided. Thus, we must take action to save them from the dangers they are being exposed to. After much deliberation we decided not to base our appeal on the UN Declaration of Human Rights as it was made by the governments of the world to serve themselves. Instead we went back to its root, chose a declaration that was made during the American Independence Revolution in 1776 by the citizens of America. It embraces the universal value of the human race, and it was the basis for the Constitution of America. It is known as the Constitution of Virginia:
Section 3. Government instituted for common benefit.
“That government is, or ought to be, instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security of the people, nation, or community; of all the various modes and forms of government, that is best which is capable of producing the greatest degree of happiness and safety, and is most effectually secured against the danger of maladministration; and, whenever any government shall be found inadequate or contrary to these purposes, a majority of the community hath an indubitable, inalienable, and indefeasible right to reform, alter, or abolish it, in such manner as shall be judged most conducive to the public weal.”
We have decided to hold a Citizens Tribunal “by the people, of the people, for the people” so we the people can judge whether the above mentioned decision by the court is not only correct but also ethically just. Our appeal will also draw from the universal values expressed in the “Convention on the Rights of the Child”, which itself is based on the Declaration of Human Rights, as it is specifically applicable to children.
We are calling our appeal “The World Citizens’ Tribunal of the “Fukushima Evacuate Children Lawsuit”. Through this tribunal we wish to achieve a judgment that reflects the values of human rights, not business or corporate interests. The children of Fukushima deserve a judgment that is just and ethically sincere. The right to live and study in a clean and healthy environment is their God given right.
We believe that the current judgment is a farce, for if it was reasonable, then the Prime Minister of Japan, and all the members of his cabinet, as well as all the executives from TEPCO, Hitachi and the other major companies behind the nuclear industry here in Japan would have no hesitation in sending their children and grandchildren to live and study in Koriyama. If Koriyama is truly a safe place for children to live and study, then they will have no hesitation in relocating the younger members of their families to Koriyama for the entire duration of their school lives.
Click here to view the Japanese version of this page.
1 . What has in fact happened since 3.11 as well as the condition of the children in Fukushima up to the court filing on June 24th, 2011.
Running through the wind, with their cheeks red, mouthfuls of raspberries, filled with the excitement, catching insects, rolling over the snow fields… Those were the children of Fukushima.
The massive accident on 3.11 at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant has completely changed Fukushima prefecture. In Koriyama where the14 children who are the plaintiffs in the lawsuit live, many of the citizens were exposed to the invisible radiation from the damaged power plants. After the accident no iodine tablets were distributed and no announcements of radiation levels were made.
One father without knowing the imminent danger had his son stand in line to get their ration of water from a water truck. One high school girl was outside everyday participating in after-school track and field activities. One mother brought her daughter back to Fukushima from her safe haven far from Fukushima as she had been instructed that her daughter had to attend her school graduation ceremony.
The citizens later learned that much of the safety information, including the data from the Japanese SPEED 1 Radiation Plume Monitoring System was intentionally hidden so the people in the surrounding regions had no idea as to the actual danger they faced.
At the same time the accidents themselves were trivialized by the Ministry of Education and Science backed "Safe Campaign" that raised the internationally accepted 1 mSv/y exposure standard to 20 mSv/y. At the same time the Japanese government raised other safety standards beyond levels that are internationally agreed upon.
With much anxiety and fear the parents have made desperate efforts to protect their children but the only measure that the government has taken to ensure the safety of their children and health has been a basic cleanup of the radioactive fallout, that in reality, has not significantly lowered the exposure levels.
To adequately ensure their safety and health, the only option the children had and still have is voluntary evacuation, as Koriyama has not been designated as an evacuation zone. Voluntary evacuation naturally would mean the children would have to leave their family and friends and move to an unknown world. Some families with the financial resources have sent their children to other locations. However, for the parents of these 14 children, such an option was and is not financially possible.
For these compelling reasons and more, the 14 children became the petitioners who filed "Fukushima Evacuate Children Lawsuit".
2. Reason of the pleading and its significance
(1) Why did we file the Pleading?
The Education Ministry, in response to the massive outcries of the parents in Fukushima, corrected their earlier standard that had allowed school activities in Fukushima to continue within radiation levels up to 20 mSv/year. Finally they agreed with the parents that 1 mSv/year should be the maximum level that children be allowed to be exposed to.
After checks were carried out almost all the schools in Fukushima prefecture were found to be contaminated with levels greater than 1 mSv/year. What is even more shocking, the central areas of Koriyama, where the plaintiffs live, were found to be extremely dangerous, with levels of 5 mSv/year or more. Under the Chernobyl Evacuation Standard (more than 5 mSv/year) the whole area would have been considered a mandatory evacuation area. In other words, had this been Russia, the government would have forced all the people to move to safer locations. (See the Contamination Map)
Click on the map to enlarge it!
In spite of the strong demands from hundreds of parents neither the Ministry of Education nor the local government showed any intent to actually move the children to safe locations.
The world must be clear about one thing. The Japanese government is completely responsible for the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant accident and thus for the irreparable damage they are causing to the children and citizens affected by the radiation. Though they are 100% responsible, they have not taken the steps they are obligated to take to save the children whose lives and health they have knowingly put at risk.
This irresponsible behavior by the Japanese government is an unprecedented violation of human rights, and as its implications are so serious we feel it should be considered a "crime against humanity" under international law.
The original purpose of the court system was and is to provide citizens with a way to remedy grievances and violations of their intrinsic rights. As the state and local governments have ignored the outcries of the citizens in their suffering, we decided to use the court system to achieve the outcome the children deserve.
In this case we want to bring justice to the members of the government that have and continue to cause irreparable damage to all the children remaining in Fukushima.
We filed our case, the "Fukushima Evacuate Children Lawsuit" on June 24, 2011. In it 14 elementary/middle school children from Koriyama filed a provisional disposition against the city of Koriyama, arguing that "the children should have the right to education in a safe place".
(2) Significance of the Pleading
This pleading is ultimately purposed so that all the children whose lives and health are at risk as a result of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant accident can get their education in a safe environment. As it would be impossible under the current judicial system for the government to implement such a measure immediately, it was necessary to provide a precedent. Thus we put together our lawsuit with the 14 school children.
It was our plan that if our initial case was approved, we would move forward to achieve the same outcome for all the school children in Fukushima that are currently in this dangerous situation. Based on the court order that the 14 children must be evacuated, as it is their right to receive their education in a safe environment, negotiations between the citizens and the government would begin for the rest of the children. In that sense, the 14 children filed the suit on behalf of all the children in Fukushima.
3. Development of the Trial
As this evacuation lawsuit was unprecedented, we initially were concerned that our pleading might be dismissed at submission, but the court accepted our pleading and thus it became a legal and binding case.
The hearings for trial were expected to be completed on September 9, 2011 with both parties giving their concluding remarks. On that day however, we submitted new evidence that was disclosed by the Ministry of Education in late August. This evidence from the government included cesium soil contamination data for Koriyama. This made it possible for us for the first time to compare the radiation levels between Koriyama City and the surrounding areas of Chernobyl where radioactive fallout had polluted the environment.
We also included a document by Ryukyu University Prof Emeritus Katsuma Yagasaki who compared Koriyama City with the Lugyny (Luginy) region in Ukraine, where the level of cesium pollution is similar to that in Koriyama. Prof Yagasaki concluded that if the children in Koriyama remain where they are, the same health effects will be expected for them as reported in Lugyny (Luginy) after the Chernobyl accident.
To our shock Koriyama City refused to discuss this comparison with Lugyny (Luginy), ignoring our submission, stating that this issue was "unknown". In other words, they examined the evidence but refused to discuss it.
They then stated that those who feel that it is a health risk to remain in Koriyama are free to move if they want, as all students have the right to change schools. Finally they said that it was TEPCO, not Koriyama City, who infringed upon the right of students to get an education in safe place, therefore, it was not the duty of Koriyama City to evacuate the children to safe areas.
With these words Koriyama City openly and officially declared that they are not responsible for their citizens and thus violated the basic human rights of the citizens they are responsible for.
After this statement in the court by Koriyama City, we decided to do everything in our power to gather as much evidence from the Chernobyl accident as we could so that deeper and more detailed comparisons could be made with Koriyama City. The court and the citizens of Koriyama have a right to know what the expected health consequences will be if they remain in Koriyama.
Thus we needed more time to gather evidence, so the trial was extended to the end of October.
4. 12/16 Conclusion of Court Decision and its grounds
An urgent provisional disposition was requested for the case. However, the Koriyama court took their time to arrive at their ruling which was finally announced on December 16th, exactly 45 days after the conclusion of examination. It fell, rather coincidently, on the same day that Prime Minister Noda publicly announced that the Fukushima Daiichi reactors were now in a "Cold Shut Down Condition". The Koriyama district court dismissed the pleading of the plaintiffs, the14 school children in Koriyama.
The court said that the primary reason for their decision is that it felt the 14 children were in fact demanding the exclusive mandatory evacuation of all elementary/middle school students in the region. (The number is estimated to be 300,000.) The court said that such a large-scale evacuation would require concrete evidence proving that there is an immediate risk to the lives and physical health of the 14 plaintiffs. The court claims that their basis for evacuation would be only if levels in the air in the area where the children live were to be found to be more than 100mSv/year. The court went on to claim that there is no evidence of such levels in the air.
On the fact that the levels are not above 100mSv/year, the plaintiffs agree.
This 100mSv/year that the judge adopted however, is not the internationally accepted safety level. The court has not revealed the scientific grounds for their decision to use 100mSv/year as their evacuation standard.
There is currently no internationally accepted evacuation standard. The internationally accepted safety standard is 1mSv/year.
In any area that has a level of more than 1mSv/year, people are advised that there is no immediate risk to their health. They are not required by law to evacuate, but it is generally considered not healthy to be exposed to such a level for an extended amount of time.
In the case of the Chernobyl accident, the Russian government evacuated all citizens from areas contaminated with 5mSv/year or higher.
The chief judge Hibiki Shimizu in his ruling, did not mention or refer to any of the evidence we submitted in this matter. Specifically, we prepared a comparison between the radiation levels measured in Chernobyl and the levels in Koriyama City at the time of submission. Our evidence clearly shows that the levels in Koriyama City would have warranted the Russian government to designate the area as a mandatory evacuation zone.
In our submission and during the court proceedings that went on for several months prior to the judgment, the court did not make a single reference to the 100mSv /year safety standard that the court based its final decision on. In the modern judiciary system, a judgment must be based on evidence submitted and discussed by both parties. As there was no such discussion in this case, the courts ruling cannot be considered fair nor can it be considered legal.
The court has thus trampled upon the very principles of the modern judicial system that is meant to be the "Last Fortress of Human Rights".
5. Actions to correct the injustice of the court decision in order to save the children of Fukushima, whose lives and health are at risk
The conclusions reached by the court demonstrate that the judicial system in Japan has lost its integrity and can no longer be relied upon to deliver fair and just judgments. It is clear that the judicial system in Japan is no longer the “Last Fortress of Human Rights” that it was designed to be. It has committed a serious crime that gives its seal of approval to the state and local governments’ violations of human rights.
These violations have put the lives and health of the children living in Fukushima at risk, a risk that is not only serious but also unwarranted. Our duty as adults is to protect children from dangerous situations, especially those that can be avoided. Thus, we must take action to save them from the dangers they are being exposed to. After much deliberation we decided not to base our appeal on the UN Declaration of Human Rights as it was made by the governments of the world to serve themselves. Instead we went back to its root, chose a declaration that was made during the American Independence Revolution in 1776 by the citizens of America. It embraces the universal value of the human race, and it was the basis for the Constitution of America. It is known as the Constitution of Virginia:
Section 3. Government instituted for common benefit.
“That government is, or ought to be, instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security of the people, nation, or community; of all the various modes and forms of government, that is best which is capable of producing the greatest degree of happiness and safety, and is most effectually secured against the danger of maladministration; and, whenever any government shall be found inadequate or contrary to these purposes, a majority of the community hath an indubitable, inalienable, and indefeasible right to reform, alter, or abolish it, in such manner as shall be judged most conducive to the public weal.”
We have decided to hold a Citizens Tribunal “by the people, of the people, for the people” so we the people can judge whether the above mentioned decision by the court is not only correct but also ethically just. Our appeal will also draw from the universal values expressed in the “Convention on the Rights of the Child”
We are calling our appeal “The World Citizens’ Tribunal of the “Fukushima Evacuate Children Lawsuit”. Through this tribunal we wish to achieve a judgment that reflects the values of human rights, not business or corporate interests. The children of Fukushima deserve a judgment that is just and ethically sincere. The right to live and study in a clean and healthy environment is their God given right.
We believe that the current judgment is a farce, for if it was reasonable, then the Prime Minister of Japan, and all the members of his cabinet, as well as all the executives from TEPCO, Hitachi and the other major companies behind the nuclear industry here in Japan would have no hesitation in sending their children and grandchildren to live and study in Koriyama. If Koriyama is truly a safe place for children to live and study, then they will have no hesitation in relocating the younger members of their families to Koriyama for the entire duration of their school lives.
(Translation by Gen Morita)
Click here to view the Japanese version of this page.
2012年1月1日日曜日
過去にアップされた見出し一覧
【報告】第１回裁判 ６月２３日（火） 詳細－＞こちら
【お知らせ】 ２月２７日、福島地裁で原告・被告代理人全員参加の進行協議期日。当日の午後より報告集会・学習会。詳細－＞こちら
【報告】１月１４日、子ども人権裁判１２名、親子裁判８２名が原告となり、第二次提訴。第一次提訴と合わせ、原告は子ども人権裁判３５名、親子裁判１６６名に。詳細－＞こちら
【報告】 ２０１４年８月２９日、子ども人権裁判２３名、親子裁判８４名が原告となり、第一次提訴。詳細－＞こちら
【判決直後アクションのお願い】4月24日に仙台高裁の判決（ＰＤＦ デジタル）が出ました。判決に対する皆さんの率直な思いを表明して下さい－＞こちらから（日本語版 英語版）（2013年4月25日）
【お知らせ】4.24仙台高裁判決に対するチョムスキーのコメント：裁判所が、健康への危険性を認識しながら、にもかかわらず、子どもたちを福島の地域から避難さ せようとする試みを阻んだことを知り、本当に驚いています。最も傷つきやすいもの、この場合、最も大切な財産である子どもたちをどのように扱うか以上に社会のモラルの水準を物語るものはありません。この残酷な判決が覆されることを強く希望し、信じます。－＞原文（2013年4月30日）
【5.18新宿デモ参加のお願い】みんなでつくる集団疎開実現に向けて、５月１８日の新宿デモに参加下さい。－＞こちら（2013年4月20日）【お知らせ】私たちの大原則は「非暴力」です。「暴力」を肯定するいかなる団体とも一切関わりがないことを確認しておきます。（2012年10月26日）
【お願い】子どもたちの集団疎開の即時実現を求める緊急署名に参加下さい--＞詳細 ネット署名《PC用 スマホ用》（2012年9月14日）
【お願い】いますぐ、市民一人一人が陪審員として「疎開裁判」に評決を表明して下さい--＞詳細（2012年3月3日）
【お礼】2.23新宿デモは約６５０名の参加と個人２９３名、３４団体の賛同を得て実施されました。皆さまのご協力に感謝申し上げます（2013年2月26日） 写真＆動画のまとめ-＞こちら 賛同人の人たちの声－＞こちら
【お願い】2.26新宿デモに皆さんの賛同を、メッセージを表明下さい-＞こちらから（2013年2月18日） 賛同人・賛同団体とメッセージの一覧-＞こちら
【お願い】都知事候補者と各政党と衆議院候補者に宛てた国政の最大課題についての質問状の回答に注目下さい--＞回答（政党 都知事選）（2012年12月4日）
【速報】大江健三郎さんと柄谷行人さんが「世界市民法廷」に支持と支援の表明--＞詳細 （大江 柄谷）（2012年1月29日）
【速報】日本の放送局がどこも取り上げなかった疎開裁判の判決前夜を韓国の公共放送ＫＢＳが特集放送（2012年1月16日）
【速報】ノーム･チョムスキーが「ふくしま集団疎開裁判」と世界市民法廷に支持と支援の表明ー＞詳細 （2012年1月12日）
【お知らせ】クリス・バズビー博士は、2011年12月12日に、ＣＢＦＣＦ（福島の子どもたちのためのクリストファー・バズビー・ファンデーション）およびジェームス・ライアン氏との関係を正式に絶ったことを確認しました。ー＞詳細 （2012年1月12日）
※ 関連の【ご注意】(2011年9月19日）
【速報】今すぐ、命の危険にさらされているふくしまの子どもたちを救うために 十二人の怒れる市民による「ふくしま集団疎開裁判」世界市民法廷の開催を決定
English Version
※あなたの評決が子どもたちを救います。まだの方は今すぐ-->こちらから
「私たちは１００％」チェルノブイリ避難基準の強制避難地域で教育を受ける子どもたちです。
「０％の人たち」の手によって、私たちの命が危険にさらされるという不正義を、昨年暮れ、裁判所もお墨付きを与えました（12月16日決定）。私たちはこのような理不尽な不正義を許す訳には行きません。
正義の裁きを下すため、2012年冬、「ふくしま集団疎開裁判」の世界市民法廷を開催することにしました。
以下、生原稿ですが（今後、詳細を公表）、発表します。
※ 関連
「人々をマインドコントロールできたとしても、放射能をマインドコントロールすることはできない 」（柳原敏夫）
「『愛子さま』は疎開しないだろうか」（柳原敏夫）
※あなたの評決が子どもたちを救います。まだの方は今すぐ-->こちらから
「私たちは１００％」チェルノブイリ避難基準の強制避難地域で教育を受ける子どもたちです。
「０％の人たち」の手によって、私たちの命が危険にさらされるという不正義を、昨年暮れ、裁判所もお墨付きを与えました（12月16日決定）。私たちはこのような理不尽な不正義を許す訳には行きません。
正義の裁きを下すため、2012年冬、「ふくしま集団疎開裁判」の世界市民法廷を開催することにしました。
以下、生原稿ですが（今後、詳細を公表）、発表します。
- ３.１１以来、６.２４の申立までのふくしまの現実と子どもたちの状況
頬を真っ赤にして、風の中を走りぬけ、木イチゴをほおばり、虫取りに胸を躍らせ、雪原をころげまわる・・・。それが、ふくしまの子どもたちでした。
３・１１福島第一原発の巨大事故により、ふくしまはすっかり変わってしまいました。 疎開裁判の申立人である14名の子どもたちが住む郡山市では、安定ヨウ素剤の配布もなく、放射能測定値が公表されない中で、多くの市民が目には見えない放射能に曝されたのです。
息子を給水車の列に並ばせてしまった父親がいました。毎日屋外での部活に出かけた高校生がいました。卒業式を行うという学校の指示に従い、避難先から娘を連れて戻ってきた母親がいました。
ＳＰＥＥＤＩのデータをはじめとする情報は隠され、「安全キャンペーン」により、事故は矮小化されました。文科省の年間２０ｍＳｖの基準に象徴されるように、さまざまな基準値が突然引き上げられました。
不安と恐怖の中で、親たちは必死で子どもを守ろうとしてきましたが、行政による子どもたちの命と健康の確保は、除染という方法しかなされませんでした。避難区域に指定されていない郡山市の子どもたちには命と健康を確保するためには自主避難という方法しかありませんでした。しかし、自主避難は、子どもたちにとっては、友だちと別れ、知らない世界に飛び込まなければならないことでした。親たちにとっては、大きな経済的負担や家族が別れ別れになることが余儀なくされるため、その選択を誰もができた訳ではありません。
そのような中で、申立人となった14名の子どもたちはやむにやまれぬ思いで、「ふくしま集団疎開裁判」を起こしたのです。
- 申立の理由とその意味
(1)、なぜ、申立をしたのか？
文科省は、福島県の父母たちの抗議を受けて、２０１１年５月２７日に、福島県内の学校について、空間線量の値が年間２０ｍＳｖ以下なら教育ＯＫという基準を改め、年間１ｍＳｖ以下を目指すと訂正しました。
しかし、現実に福島県内の学校は殆ど全てが年間１ｍＳｖ以上の汚染状況であり、それどころか郡山市中心部では殆ど全てがチェルノブイリ避難基準で強制的に避難させられる移住義務地域（年５ｍＳｖ以上）に該当する極めて危険な状態でした（汚染マップ参照）。これに対し、文科省と自治体は、福島県の父母たちが強く求めたにもかかわらず、子どもたちを安全な場所に移して教育を実施しようとしませんでした。そもそも政府は福島第一原発事故の加害者です。加害者という身でありながら、いわれなき人災のために命と健康の危険にさらされている子どもたちをこのまま放置しておくことは、過去に例を見ない凶悪な人権侵害行為であるのみならず、国際法上の犯罪である「人道に対する罪」に該当する重大犯罪です。
そこで、苦しみの中で救済を求めている市民の声に耳を傾けようとしない政府と自治体の人権侵害行為をただすため、「人権の最後の砦」として政府等の病理現象を正すことを本来の使命とする裁判所に救済を訴え出ました。それが２０１１年６月２４日、郡山市の小中学生14名が郡山市を相手に訴えた「子供たちを安全な場所で教育せよ」を求める裁判（仮処分申立）です。
(2)、申立の意味とは
この疎開裁判が最終的に目指すのは、福島第一原発事故のために命と健康の危険にさらされている全ての子どもたちが安全な場所で教育を受けられるようにすることです。しかし、今の裁判制度ではそれを直ちに実現することは不可能です。そこで、まず、郡山市の14名の小中学生がいわば先駆けとなって、救済を求める裁判を起こしました。もしこの訴えが認められたら、次に、14名の小中学生と同様の危険な環境に置かれている全ての子どもたちの救済を、「子供たちを安全な場所で教育せよ」という裁判所の命令を踏まえて、市民による対行政交渉を通じて実現するというプランでした。その意味で、この14名は被ばくにより命と健康の危険にさらされている全ての子どもたちを事実上代表して、訴訟に出たのです。
- 審理の経過
疎開裁判は過去に例を見ない裁判のため、形式的な理由で門前払いされるおそれがありましたが、裁判所は門前払いせず、子どもたちの被ばくの危険性という裁判の主題の検討（実体審理）に入りました。
当初、２０１１年９月９日で審理を終え、結論を出す予定でしたが、当日、私たちが提出した書面により審理は異例の延長となりました。８月末に文科省が公表したセシウムの土壌汚染のデータにより、初めてチェルノブイリ事故との具体的な対比が可能となったからです（セシウムの汚染度が郡山市と同程度のルギヌイ地区を取り上げ、チェルノブイリ事故以後、その地区で発生した異常な健康障害が、郡山の子どもたちをこのままにしておくと、今後、同様の健康障害が発生することが予測されると指摘した矢ヶ崎克馬琉球大学名誉教授の意見書など）。
これに対し、郡山市は、チェルノブイリ事故との対比について「不知」と答えるのみで、転校の自由があるのだから危険だと思う者は自主的に引っ越せばよい、安全な場で教育を受ける権利を侵害したのは東電であって自分たちではない、だから郡山市は子どもたちを安全な場所に避難させる義務を負わないと反論しました。これは人権宣言の正反対とも言うべき人権侵害の宣言です。
これに対し、私たちは、その後もチェルノブイリ事故との対比に関する証拠を精力的に提出し、万全を期しました。こうして、延長戦の審理は10月末に終了しました。
- １２．１６判決（決定）の結論と理由
仮処分申立は本来、緊急に救済を実現するためのものですが、今回、裁判所が判断を下したのは審理終結から45日経過した、奇しくも、野田総理大臣が福島第一原発事故の原子炉は「冷温停止状態」になったと宣言したのと同じ1２月１６日でした。結果も同じく「避難停止状態」、子どもたちの申立を却下するものでした。
理由のエッセンスは、14名の申立は郡山市の全ての小中学生を有無を言わせず一律に疎開を求めるというものであるから、その要件は厳格に解する必要があること、そのためには14名の子どもたちの生命身体に対する具体的に切迫した危険性があること、その危険性を判断する上で最大の論拠となるのは空間線量の値が年間１００ｍＳｖ以上であること、ところが、14名の子どもたちが通う学校の空間線量の値が年間１００ｍＳｖ以上であることの証明はない、というものでした。
他方で、私たちが最も力を入れて主張・立証した「チェルノブイリ事故との対比」に対して、裁判所は一切応答せず、これを黙殺しました。
また、申立却下の最大の根拠となったいわゆる１００ｍＳｖ問題（１００ｍＳｖ未満の放射線量を受けた場合における晩発性障害の発生確率について実証的な裏付けがないかどうかという問題）について、審理の中では一度も当事者からも裁判所からも取り上げられたことがなかったにもかかわらず、裁判所は判決の中で、いきなり、なおかつ当事者が提出した証拠に基づかずに認定しました。つまり、裁判所は、処分権主義、弁論主義、証拠裁判主義といった「人権の最後の砦」を支える近代裁判の基本原則をことごとく踏みにじることで申立却下という結論を導き出したのです（その詳細は、裁判所の判決（決定）に対するコメント(1) コメント(2) コメント(3)）。
- 判決を是正し、今、命の危険にさらされているふくしまの子どもたちを救うために必要な取組み
裁判所の判決（決定）は「人権の最後の砦」である司法の自殺であり、政府と自治体の凶悪な人権侵害行為にお墨付きを与える重大犯罪です。そのため、ふくしまの子どもたちは今、命の危険という重大な危機にさらされています。これを救うために、私たちは再び、人類普遍の価値を有する近代の人権宣言の原点に帰って行動を起こすことにしました。その原点の１つがアメリカ独立革命のヴァージニア憲法３条です。
「政府は人民、国家または社会の利益、保護および安全のために樹立される。いかなる政府も、これらの目的に反するか、または不十分であると認められた場合には、社会の多数の者は、その政府を改良し、変改し、または廃止する権利を有する。この権利は、疑う余地のない、人に譲ることのできない、また棄てることもできないものである。」
私たちは、今から「市民の、市民による、市民のための市民法廷」を開催し、世界中の市民から構成される陪審員の手によって、上記の裁判所の判決が正しいかどうか、過っているならばその正しい判断と理由は何かについて、人類普遍の価値を有する人権宣言とそれを子どもに適用した「子どもの権利条約」に基づいて裁くことにしました。それが「ふくしま集団疎開裁判」世界市民法廷の開催です。
この世界市民法廷を通じて、今、命の危険にさらされているふくしまの子どもたちを救うために、世界中の良識ある市民から支持される正しい裁きを下したいと思います。
以 上
※ 関連
「人々をマインドコントロールできたとしても、放射能をマインドコントロールすることはできない 」（柳原敏夫）
「『愛子さま』は疎開しないだろうか」（柳原敏夫）
登録:
投稿 (Atom)