English 
Japanese 
Spanish 
French 
Bengali 
Myanmar 
Nepali 
Tagalog 
Urdu 
Thai 
Persian 
ZWC_yamada 
On June 16, 2015, the Tokyo District Court issued a ruling overturning the "deportation order" issued by the Minister of Justice against a Bangladeshi family.
Since first entering Japan in 1997, the plaintiff has diligently studied Japanese and worked hard to support his wife and son, whom he brought to Japan. However, due to problems with the circumstances of his entry into the country, his entire family was ordered to leave. The plaintiff's family then sought to have the order overturned by the government.
The Ministry of Justice and the Immigration Bureau denied the plaintiffs' residency permit without considering that the plaintiff's father suffered from ulcerative colitis, a serious illness, that his son had a testicular abnormality requiring surgery, and that the plaintiff's mother needed to care for both of them. However, this ruling has invalidated the Immigration Bureau's decision, and the deportation order has been overturned.
This Bangladeshi family has lived in Japan for a long time, and their lives are already established there. Their son has entered kindergarten, and they strongly hope to continue living in Japan in the future. This ruling has brought great hope to this Bangladeshi family.
What is particularly noteworthy about this ruling is its emphasis on the necessity of treatment in Japan for the plaintiff's father's ulcerative colitis. The court stated that "if he returns to Bangladesh, it will be difficult to obtain the necessary quantity of appropriate medications for effective treatment, to receive appropriate treatment if the symptoms of ulcerative colitis recur, and to receive appropriate treatment if the symptoms worsen and require surgical treatment. Therefore, he is in a position where he needs treatment in Japan," which stands in stark contrast to the Immigration Bureau's judgment that "symptoms will not worsen overseas if living conditions are taken into consideration" and "it is possible to continuously obtain medicines through public hospitals (in Bangladesh)."
AlsoThe district court cited Article 12, Paragraph 1 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (Economic Rights Covenant), which states that "States that are signatories to this Covenant recognize that all persons have the right to enjoy the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health," and cited the provision that requires "the creation of conditions that ensure medical care and nursing for all persons in the event of illness," concluding that "the Tokyo Immigration Bureau's judgment that it should not grant special permission to stay to the plaintiff's family, in accordance with the spirit of the Convention, is remarkably unreasonable in light of social norms." This directly contradicted the Immigration Bureau's judgment that "the fact that the plaintiffs suffer from ulcerative colitis does not constitute a circumstance that should be given special consideration in the judgment regarding permission to stay."
While the defendant country may appeal, this landmark ruling, which recognizes the "right to enjoy health" even for foreigners, is a ray of hope for the Bangladeshi family and is expected to open up new possibilities for foreigners in similar situations living in Japan.
The Bangladeshi family hopes to continue receiving treatment for their illness and to live as members of Japanese society. APFS strongly urges the government not to appeal.