EDITORIAL: Minamata disease deal

The issue of financial relief for uncertified victims of Minamata disease, an environmental catastrophe regarded as the nation's first case of industrial pollution, has arrived at a critical juncture.

In a lawsuit brought by uncertified patients seeking damages, the plaintiffs and the three defendants--the central government, the Kumamoto prefectural government and Chisso Corp., the company that discharged mercury into Minamata Bay--have accepted a settlement plan proposed by the Kumamoto District Court.

The agreement clears the way for a resolution of this vexing issue 54 years after the disease was first recognized by a local public health center. It marks the first time the central government has shown a willingness to come to the negotiation table. Given the historic shift that brought the administration to power last fall, Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama and his Cabinet must be keen to extract this long-stuck thorn from the side of Japanese society.

We frankly salute the administration's efforts to resolve the problem. For the victims, however, swallowing the court-brokered plan must have been painful. The lump-sum payment of 2.1 million yen ($22,700) for each sufferer is less than the amount paid under a "political settlement" reached 15 years ago. Also, there are no guarantees that all the victims will get relief.

Despite the drawbacks, the plaintiffs decided to accept the settlement because the victims are now advanced in years. Had they rejected the court's proposal, relief would likely not have been secured within their lifetimes. We profoundly empathize with the bitter frustration they must feel.

The judgment on whether individual plaintiffs are entitled to relief comes next. Uncertified victims who did not bring suits but are demanding compensation under last summer's Minamata disease victim relief law will be eligible for the same level of aid as proposed in the court's opinion.

We can only sigh, however, when we reflect on the deplorable and confused history of the government's handling of Minamata disease.

There are three separate Minamata disease victims groups, which differ in terms of standards to recognize symptoms and compensation values offered. One group consists of patients certified under the pollution-related health damage compensation law. A group of uncertified victims accepted the political settlement of 1995. And the other group of uncertified victims living in the Kansai region won a lawsuit in 2004 that went all the way to the Supreme Court. With this latest court action, yet another Minamata disease victim group has been formed.

Still, many other victims have been overlooked. These are people who live in regions other than those designated for relief in the court opinion or who were born after the November 1969 cut-off period for coverage. This became clear from examinations performed by private-sector physicians last fall, with new victims coming forward each time health checks were undertaken.

The root of this situation lies in the government's refusal to revamp its existing recognition standards, which were established in 1977, or revise its narrow view of what constitutes suffering. This has spawned a series of stopgap measures that have done little to fundamentally resolve the situation. The measures are apparently driven by a shortsighted desire to somehow resolve the dispute at hand.

Any genuine resolution to the Minamata disease problem must include a framework for lasting compensation and relief as demanded by the victims. The government needs to assess the damage in all polluted regions and revise its recognition requirements in line with the actual state of distress.

Minamata disease, the result of a company polluting its own backyard, typifies the reckless disregard for people's health that accompanied Japan's high-growth period after World War II. Indeed, it is an episode destined to remain forever etched in the chronicles of environmental and human destruction.

The government should seize the opportunity to shed light on past administrative responsibility, and make this the starting point for preventing a recurrence of such a terrible tragedy.

--The Asahi Shimbun, March 31