last update: 20151125
■INTRODUCTION
Japan’s public assistance system is an essential social security system that realizes all citizens’ right to survive. The administration of this system, however, has often been conducted in a manner that violates the human rights of those receiving assistance.
Japan’s Public Assistance Act states, “The purpose of this Act is for the State to guarantee a minimum standard of living as well as to promote self-support for all citizens who are in living in poverty by providing the necessary public assistance according to the level of poverty.” This Act is based on the principle prescribed in article 25 of the constitution that “all people shall have the right to maintain the minimum standards of wholesome and cultured living.”
■PURPOSE
This poster examines a case in which the administration of support at a welfare office violated the law. The problem arose in 2012, when case workers at a welfare office forced public assistance recipients and applicants to sign a written pledge. This written pledge was discriminatory and repressive. This poster examines the case of this pledge and the problems in the administration of public assistance in Japan it indicates.
■EXCERPTS FROM THE WRITTEN PLEDGE
1) I pledge to never make a false declaration of any kind.
2) If there are multiple incidents in which, for whatever reason, I prioritize private matters, do not come at the promised time, do not fulfill my contact obligation, or fail to prepare documents, since this is my own responsibility I leave my treatment based on the termination of public assistance entirely in your hands.
3) If I claim to be a person with a mental illness, disease or injury, I will obtain a medical examination in accordance with the city’s order, and, if a result saying that I cannot work is not forthcoming, I pledge that I will set a date to start employment and work toward the goal of becoming independent. No self-assessment or self-labeling as mentally ill, diseased or injured will be accepted. I will follow the instructions of the doctor and other staff in charge of my care, and devote myself to undergoing treatment. I understand/confirm that if the responsible staff determine that I have not behaved in the manner described above I will be subject to being dealt with in a manner that includes within its scope the termination of assistance.
■WHAT ARE THE PROBLEMS WITH THE WRITTEN PLEDGE?
Having people who are seeking to receive public assistance sign the pledge is a violation of their right to apply for assistance.
This is a problem because it is easy to see that the use of this pledge when an application is made will cause some applicants to lose their resolve to apply. This is an extremely serious problem, because if people requiring assistance abandon their application there is a risk of their starving to death or killing themselves.
This document forces people with a mental illness, disease or injury to pledge to seek employment if a doctor determines that it is possible for them to work.
This is a problem because investigations of medical conditions by case workers in the administration of public assistance, unlike a “medical certificate/diagnosis” on which a doctor spends a considerable amount of time, are extremely brief. Often these investigations consist only of the caseworker speaking to a doctor for a few minutes on the telephone. As a result there is a lot of room for the subjective views of the caseworker, and there is a risk of recipients who are in fact unable to work being subjected to employment guidance.
■CONCLUSION
In conclusion, this written pledge is a case of discriminatory and repressive administration of public assistance, and signifies the public assistance system’s disregard for the self-determination of recipients. In order to improve this system, it is therefore essential for those who require public assistance to assert self-determination not as “recipients” of this assistance but rather as its “users.”
＊作成：中村亮太