Landmark ruling for Bangladeshi family - APFS urges state not to appeal

On June 16, 2015, the Tokyo District Court handed down a ruling revoking the "deportation order" issued by the Minister of Justice to a Bangladeshi family.
Since first entering Japan in 1997, the plaintiff has worked hard to learn the Japanese language and to support his wife and son, whom he had brought over from Japan. However, there were problems with the circumstances surrounding his entry into Japan, and the entire family was ordered to leave. In response, the plaintiff's family has filed a lawsuit against the government to have the order revoked.

The Ministry of Justice - the Immigration Bureau - did not allow the plaintiffs to stay without taking into consideration that the plaintiff's father suffered from ulcerative colitis, that the plaintiff's son had a testicular abnormality and needed surgery, and that the plaintiff's mother needed to care for both of them. However, this ruling denied the validity of the Immigration Bureau's decision, and the deportation order was revoked.

The Bangladeshi family has lived in Japan for a long time and their life base is already in Japan. Their son has entered kindergarten and they strongly hoped 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 that it emphasized the need for the plaintiff's father to continue treatment in Japan for his ulcerative colitis. "If he returned to Bangladesh, it would be difficult to obtain the necessary amount of appropriate drug treatment to continue effective treatment, to properly treat his ulcerative colitis if it recurs, and to properly treat him if his symptoms become severe and surgical treatment becomes necessary. Therefore, he is in a position where he needs treatment in Japan," it said. This is in stark contrast to the Immigration Bureau's ruling that "his symptoms will not worsen if he is careful about his living environment overseas," and "it is possible to continue to 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 (ICESCR), which states that "States Contracting to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and health," and the clause that requires "the creation of conditions which will ensure medical care and nursing to all in case of illness," and ruled that "the Tokyo Immigration Bureau's decision that the plaintiff family should not be granted special residence permission in accordance with the spirit of the Convention is extremely unreasonable in light of accepted social standards." This directly refutes the Immigration Bureau's decision that "the fact that they suffer from ulcerative colitis is not a circumstance that requires special consideration in determining whether or not to grant residence permission."

While the defendant's country is likely to appeal the decision in the future, this groundbreaking ruling, which recognizes the "right to health" for foreigners as well, is a ray of hope for the Bangladeshi family and is likely to open up new possibilities for foreigners in similar positions living in Japan.
The Bangladeshi family hopes to continue their treatment and live as part of Japanese society. APFS strongly urges the government not to appeal.