Approving Allowance for Same-sex Partner of Victims of Crime
On the issue of whether a same-sex partner can receive the allowance for victims of crime, the court made a new decision. The Third Petty Bench of Supreme Court found that a same-sex partner of a victim of murder could be the recipient of the allowance, turning down the decision of lower courts. The decision is expected to further improve interpretation of laws to secure human rights of the couples of same-sex marriage.
The plaintiff filed a lawsuit in 2018, when he lost a man with whom he lived for over twenty years, to ask the allowance to Aichi Prefectural Public Safety Commission. A law for issuing allowance to victims of crime was established in 1981, after a blast at Mitsubishi Heavy Industry caused eight deaths in 1974 and generated public request for support on collateral damage of crimes.
The law determines that the allowance is issued to a partner without legal relationship of marriage, who had a relationship paralleled with marriage. It has been interpreted as applicable to hetero-sexual couples. In the lawsuit judged by the Supreme Court, the district court and high court had decided that the law would not be applied to the complaint, because there had not been a recognition that the provision would be applied to a same-sex marriages.
The Supreme Court recognized the purpose of the law as easing psychological and economic damages as soon as possible, and concluded that necessity for recovering from the damage would make no difference between hetero- and same-sex marriage. The court interpreted the provision of “a relationship paralleled with marriage” as including same-sex marriage.
It was an opinion of the majority with four justices out of five. One justice added an opinion opposing the majority, arguing that the provision should not be interpreted as including same-sex marriage, because accumulation of discussion on legal support for same-sex marriage was insufficient.
After the decision of the Supreme Court, the plaintiff and his lawyers evaluated it as the first example for a court to directly approve legal protection for same-sex couple.
According to a report of Tokyo Shimbun, there are two hundred and thirty laws which have the same kind of provision. Some of them are related to pension system, health care, compensation for injury in working, or working recess for raising children or taking care of old people. The decision may affect the interpretation of those laws.
In the case of Hokkaido prefectural government rejected financial support for same-sex spouse of its worker, the district court dismissed the argument. However, Hokuto City, Hokkaido, approved the allowance for victim of crime after the decision of the Supreme Court. The decision may affect the other local governments in Japan.
Comments
Post a Comment