A/HRC/25/NGO/X

United Nations

General AssemblyDistr.: GeneralXX February 2014
English only

Human Rights Council
Twenty-fifth session
Agenda item 3
Promotion and protection of all human rights, civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights, including theright to development

Written statement* submitted by Human Rights Now, a nongovernmental organization in special consultative status
The Secretary-General has received the following written statement which is circulated inaccordance with Economic and Social Council resolution 1996/31.
[18 February 2014]*This written statement is issued, unedited, in the language(s) received from the submitting nongovernmental organization(s).
GE.14-

A/HRC/25/NGO/X

Fukushima: the Japanese government to protect people’s
right to health in accordance with recommendations by theUN Special Rapporteur Anand Grover
1. Background
Nearly three years have passed since the nuclear accident at the Fukushima-Dai-ichi Nuclear Power Station,
Northeast Japan, on March 11, 2011. The Japanese government’s policies towards the affected population remains
insufficient, and there are serious concerns over the affected population’s rights to health, especially those of the mostvulnerable such as children, pregnant women, the poor, the elderly, and the mentally-ill1. Although the government
passed the Act on Protection and Support for the Victims of Nuclear Power Plant Accidents (Victims Protection Law)
in June 2012, the scope of the support policies is substantially limited. Alarmingly, the government has been
disregarding most of the recommendations made by UN Special Rapporteur Anand Grover 2 in his May 2013 report(made following his mission to Japan in November 2012). The SR recommended that the Japanese government takecomprehensive measures to prevent nuclear-related health risks to the affected community on human rights grounds.
The Japanese government has not taken into consideration the health implications of low-level radiation exposure andhas instead been implementing policies premised on the assumption that radiation exposure lower than 100mSv/year issafe. The government's decisions do not reflect the voices of the victims and affected communities.
2. People living in contaminated areas
Many people, including children and pregnant women, still live in areas highly contaminated by the nuclear
accident. This is because the government delineated the evacuation zones based on an exposure level of 20 millisieverts
per year, a threshold 20 times higher than international protection standards. In areas with radiation levels below thisthreshold, many have no choice but to remain in these contaminated locations since the government provides almost nosupport. This disregards international standards and also contradicts wider domestic regulatory standard which prohibits
entry to areas with radiation levels above 5mSv/year.
Based on this insufficient standard, the government now plans to undesignate some previous evacuation areas(within 20km ring). Since this decision will be accompanied by termination of monthly compensation by TEPCO,
evacuate people will be forced to decide between returning to contaminated areas and remaining in inadequate,
temporary shelters with very little financial support. One particularly important recommendation from Anand Groveradvised the government to set the radiation exposure threshold to 1mSv/year and base its health-protection policies on
this threshold. The Special Rapporteur (SR) referred to epidemiological studies concerning the health implications oflow-dose radiation exposure, and pointing out its dangerous effect on human health. The SR called on the government
to protect the right to health of the most vulnerable, such as children and pregnant women, by minimizing the impact on
their health. He advised the Japanese government to “Formulate a national plan on evacuation zones and does limits ofradiation by using current scientific evidence, based on human rights rather than on a risk-benefit analysis, and reduce
the radiation does to less than 1mSv/year” (para 78 (a)). The report continues, counseling that “evacuees should berecommended to return only when the radiation dose has been reduced as far as possible and to levels below 1mSv/year.
In the meantime, the Government should continue providing financial support and subsidies to all evacuees so that they
can make a voluntary decision to return to their homes or remain evacuated” 3 . None of this advice has yet been
implemented.
3. Affected People’s Rights to Health1

Human Rights Now is an international human rights NGO based in Tokyo, Japan <http://hrn.or.jp/eng>
A/HRC/23/41/Add.3
3
A/HRC/23/41/Add.3 p.17
22

A/HRC/25/NGO/X

The Japanese authorities have taken inadequate measures to protect people’s right to health. The Special
Rapporteur noted that the health management survey conducted by Fukushima prefectural authorities was insufficientand urged the Japanese government to monitor “the impact of radiation on the health of affected persons throughholistic and comprehensive screening for a considerable length of time and make appropriate treatment available tothose in need” (para.77(a)), emphasizing that “health monitoring should be provided to persons residing in all affectedareas with radiation exposure higher than 1mSv/year”(para.77(b)) 4. The government should also avoid “limiting thehealth check-up for children to thyroid checks and [instead] extend check-ups for all possible health effects, including
urine and blood tests”(para.77(e))5 and “make follow-up and secondary examination for children’s thyroid check-up
available to all requesting children and parents”(para.77(f)) 6. These recommendations have been ignored.
At present, for people living in the affected area, the health management survey is limited to a behavior survey
immediately following the disaster and a thyroid test for children residing in Fukushima. The thyroid examinations
extend only to those under 18, and follow-up tests are limited to one every two years, despite the fact that during thecourse of the existing survey 74 cases of thyroid cancer were either identified or suspected. Other than thyroid
examinations, the government has not conducted any health monitoring for people living in the affected area (such as
blood or urine sampling, dentistry, ophthalmology, etc.) nor kept any record of illness besides thyroid cancer.
4. Power Plant and Decontamination Workers
One of the important recommendations made by the Special Rapporteur was that the government needs to“monitor the health effects of radiation on nuclear plant workers and provide necessary treatment” (para.77(j))7 and“take all measures to provide an environment that does not exacerbate their vulnerability and provide access toaffordable and quality health facilities, goods and services at all times to all workers.” 8 However, theserecommendations are as yet unimplemented and the health of the workers remains a grave concern. For full timeemployees, a medical check is legally mandated by the Regulation Concerning Prevention from Radiation Hazards due
to Ionizing Radiation 9 . However, for temporary workers, those who have since left work, and those with radiation
exposure below 50mSv/year, there is no periodic monitoring system.
The Special Rapporteur also pointed out that “many workers employed in the nuclear power industry are poorand some even homeless”10. The relaxation of bidding restrictions by the Ministry of the Environment, diminishedaccountability and the convoluted system of contractors involved in government-funded radiation removal projects haveled to the mistreatment of decontamination workers in Fukushima. The sheer number and multiple layers of contracts
for each project make it impossible to reliably ascertain the reality on the ground, and the proliferation of unlawful
recruitment organizations has been reported. Because of this system, it is difficult to keep track of workers, who are
therefore not ensured the proper medical checkups the government is legally obligated to provide.11
5. Misapplication of Law
In June 2012, the government enacted the Act on Protection and Support for the Victims of Nuclear Power
Plant Accidents. It formulates a comprehensive policy regarding medical, living and employment support etc. for theaffected population, including areas with exposure levels less than 20mSv/year. However, for a year the Act was notfollowed by adequate measures. Finally a call for public comments was made in Autumn 2013. Nonetheless the policy
eventually prepared and approved by the Cabinet failed properly to reflect the voices of those affected; it mainly
promotes victims’ returning to their hometowns, whereas the Act was intended to support self-evacuation, provide long4

A/HRC/23/41/Add.3
A/HRC/23/41/Add.3
6A/HRC/23/41/Add.3
7A/HRC/23/41/Add.3
8A/HRC/23/41/Add.3, p15
9
http://www.rofuku.go.jp/Portals/0/data0/sanpo/sanpo21/sarchpdf/71_p01-11tokusyu.pdf
10
A/HRC/23/41/Add.3, p15
11
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/12/30/us-fukushima-workers-idUSBRE9BT00520131230
53

A/HRC/25/NGO/X

term medical care and checkups, and ensure access to information as well as proper risk communication, regardless ofindividuals’ choices between evacuation and return. The Victims’ organization asked the government to establish amechanism for affected people to participate the decision-making process of the implementation of Act, yet it was notachieved.
The Special Rapporteur stated that “Covered Areas’ should include those where radiation levels exceed
1mSv/year.”(p.21)12 However, the government produced a measure which covers only an extremely small proportion ofresidents.
6. Recommendations
The Japanese government is responsible for the protection of its citizens’ rights to health by virtue of Article 25of Japan’s Constitution, International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), and theConvention on the Rights of the Child.
HRN urges the Japanese government to reform all relevant policies based on the SR Grover’s recommendations
mentioned above. All the policies must be formulated based on the rights-based-approach, namely prioritizing
protection of the most vulnerable population with due consideration of health risks of low level radiation exposure. In
particular, great importance should be placed on applying the radiation dose threshold of 1mSv/year in national plansconcerning evacuation zones and in all measures providing for those affected, including implementation of the Victim
Support Act. Furthermore, the Japanese government should reform its health policy to provide free, long term, periodic
and comprehensive health checks and treatment for all affected people as well as power plant and decontamination
workers. As SR recommended, all the policy related to the response of the nuclear accident must be formulated basedon concerns for human rights and with full and effective participation of affected community, especially vulnerable
people such as women and children.

124

A/HRC/23/41/Add.3