Dear Overseas Plaintiffs of the Lawsuit against the Nuclear Reactor Suppliers,

On January 24, 2019, the Supreme Court sent the final decision to the attorney's office. It was a dismissal of our appeal. Because of the three-trial system, we cannot go further to the higher court; it means that the judicial contest is over. We held the 4th general assembly of the plaintiffs and the group of attorneys on June 15, 2019. We inform you our decision that the plaintiffs' organization will be dissolved on July 31, 2019. The following is the statement of the plaintiffs and the group of attorneys of the lawsuit against the nuclear reactor suppliers. We had a press conference to make the statement public on Jan. 30. We will keep our homepage for ten years from now on. And we want to share information on the website if we have any further ideas to go together. Please visit the website from time to time.

The Facilitators Group of the Plaintiffs
July 25, 2019

Statement by the Group of Attorneys and Plaintiffs

The Supreme Court Failed a Constitutional Judgment in a Constitutional Suit regarding the Lawsuit against Nuclear Reactor Suppliers.

January 30, 2019

  1. About Dismissal of Final Appeal

    The Supreme Court stated, "The civil case is permitted only to appeal to the Supreme Court under Article 312 paragraphs 1 or 2 of the Civil Procedure Act, and the reasons for this appeal are stipulated in the sections mentioned above. The decision to dismiss the request was made because it apparently does not fall under the basis for the call.

    Article 312, paragraph 1 of the Civil Procedure Act stipulates that "the appeal can be made when the decision is due to misinterpretation of the constitution or any other violation of the constitution." That means, in this case, we can appeal. The main points of contention are that the provision defining the Liability Concentration System under the Act on Compensation for Nuclear Damages violates the no-nukes rights based on Articles 13 and 25 of the Constitution, and Article 29 paragraph 2 of the Constitution specifying the property right. The appeal against violation of these issues hasn't changed from the first trial, and there is no doubt that this case is a constitutional case. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court has ruled out because the reason for this adjudication does not fall under the grounds of Article 312, paragraphs 1 or 2 of the Civil Procedure Act. It does not even show evidence that it is not a constitutional lawsuit. It escaped from making judgment.

  2. About the Supreme Court Decision not to Accept the Appeal

    In response to the petition for the appeal, the Supreme Court has decided not to recognize it as to be accepted under Article 318 (1) of the Civil Procedure Act". The same clause stipulates that "for cases that are deemed to contain important matters concerning the interpretation of laws and regulations ... the court can accept cases".

    The most important reason for the petition for acceptance of the appeal is the dispute over the interpretation of the wording "to preserve one's obligatory right" as a requirement for the exercise of a creditor subrogation right under Article 423 of the Civil Code. And there is a strong thesis about this issue, and we have developed a claim following this theory. Therefore, this case is "a case deemed to contain important matters concerning the interpretation of laws and regulations," and whether the Supreme Court adopts these theories is a severe concern for the people.

    Nevertheless, the Supreme Court has ruled out the petition, stating only the conclusion that "it cannot be accepted" without giving any reason.

  3. Illegal Supreme Court Decision

    As mentioned above, the Supreme Court avoided the constitutional judgment even though this case is a clear constitutional lawsuit.

    The Supreme Court did not face the problem, even though many people were deprived of their no-nukes rights by the Fukushima nuclear accident and endangered life. Not one of the four judges have dismissed the apparent constitutional violation of the concentration system and avoided the constitutional judgment, and have confirmed the mistake of the legal interpretation of the original decision. The Supreme Court decision can only be described as an overly biased interpretation far from public opinion.

    Furthermore, as is evident from recent news reports, the defendants, in this case, GE, Toshiba, and Hitachi, have all suffered setbacks with the nuclear business and have decided to withdraw substantially. It has been proved that their dreams are far from reality such as the execution of atomic power business, even nuclear reactor manufacturers who receive unreasonable protection from the government under the Act on Compensation for Nuclear Damages with two contradictory goals of "protecting victims" and "sound development of nuclear power business."

    It is not the content of the court's decision that we are strongly concerned about it. The biggest problem is that the court in charge of jurisdiction has illegally abandoned its duties. Recently, democracy is said to be collapsed in Japan, but if the court has such an attitude, how can the people protect their human rights? The Supreme Court has to defend human rights, as Article 81 of the Constitution prescribes that "the Supreme Court is the final court having the authority to decide whether any law, order, rule or disposition conforms to the Constitution." It is the last fortress of protection of human rights. This Supreme Court ruling pointed out to us the dire situation of the fundamental human rights crisis.

    A sound society can not be realized without sharing such facts with all the people. Therefore, the statement from us, the plaintiffs and the group of attorneys, is to continue to fight for the realization of no-nukes rights.



Notice of the General Meeting of the Plaintiffs on 10/23/2016

At the meeting after the judgment of July 13, 2016, many of the Japanese plaintiffs brought up an issue of the need for a proper organization of the plaintiffs for the lawsuit in order to support our legal team.
Although the date for the first oral argument at the Tokyo High Court has not decided yet, the Facilitators Group drafted a charter that stipulate the regulations of the organization. We will hold a general meeting of the plaintiffs in order to establish the organization on October 23 at the Mita Labor and Welfare Center in Tokyo.

Please see the draft of the charter below, which will be discussed at the meeting, and if you have any comments, please feel free to send them to the Overseas Plaintiffs Manager, Facilitators Group at We look forward very much to hearing from you!

We, Facilitators Group, sent out postcards or e-mails to all the overseas plaintiffs to let them know the current situation of the lawsuit in April, 2016 after the chief judge declared the court closing. However, we couldn't reach 19 American and 96 Mongolian plaintiffs because of their address changes or some other reasons. If you happen to know any plaintiffs around you, including the above, who do not receive "No Nukes Newsletter," e-mail newsletter or the postcard, please let them make a contact with the lawyers group at bengodan☆ change the "☆" to @ when you send an e-mail.)

Charter of the Plaintiffs' Association for the Lawsuit against The Nuclear Reactor Suppliers

Article 1 (Name)
The name of this association is the Plaintiffs' Association for the Lawsuit against the Nuclear Reactor Suppliers (hereafter referred to as the Association).

Article 2 (Location of Office)
The office of the Association will be located at the
R-Rights Law Office,
3rd Floor, 3-9-10 Tsukiji, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, JAPAN 104-0045

Article 3 (Purpose)
The purpose of the Association is to carry out office work, communications with plaintiffs and educational activities aimed at the general public regarding the lawsuit for damage compensation against the nuclear reactor suppliers (Tokyo District Court Heisei 26 [2014] (Wa) No.2146, Heisei 26 [2014] (Wa) No.5824 and their higher court's trials. Hereafter, Lawsuit against the Nuclear Reactor Suppliers).

Article 4 (Activities)
In order to pursue the purpose in Article 3, the Association will engage in the following activities.
1) Support for the Lawsuit against the Nuclear Reactor Suppliers
2) Communications with each plaintiff regarding the Lawsuit against the Nuclear Reactor Suppliers
3) Dissemination and educational activities regarding the Lawsuit against the Nuclear Reactor Suppliers aimed at the general public
4) Other activities necessary for the attainment of the purpose in Article 3.

Article 5 (Membership)
Members of the Association are plaintiffs who have submitted a letter of attorney for the appeal trial that recognizes as their representatives the Lawsuit against the Nuclear Reactor Suppliers legal team, joint representatives of which are the lawyer Akihiro Shima and the lawyer Hiroyuki Kawai.

Article 6 (Organization and Management of the Association)
The following officers, facilitators and facilitator group will be entrusted with smooth management of the Association.
1. Officers
The Association will appoint as officers up to three joint representative facilitators and one accountant facilitator.
2. Facilitators
The facilitators are those among the members who have been autonomously active in regard to planning, management and concrete duties of the Association, and any member may become a facilitator provided he or she has a strong will to support the legal team and struggle for the sake of this lawsuit. Further, since the duties of the Association are very wide-ranging, there is no fixed connection between particular duties and individual facilitators.
3. Facilitators Group
The facilitators group is a colloquium consisting of the facilitator representatives and the facilitators, who cooperate together to carry out the planning, management and concrete duties in regard to the activities, set down in Article 4.

Article 7 (Election of officers)
Officers of this Association are to be elected from among the members at an election held at a General Meeting. Election procedures will be stipulated elsewhere.

Article 8 (Term of officers)
1 The term of officers will be two years. However, there is no impediment to re-election. The term of officers elected to replace officer posts that become vacant during the term of an officer will be the remainder of the term of the original officer.
2 Even after expiry of the term of office, an officer must continue to carry out the necessary official duties up to the time when the successor takes office.

Article 9 (Removal of officers)
The Association can remove an officer or officers through a resolution at the General Meeting in any of the cases indicated below. In this case, the Association must inform the officer in question of such proceedings in writing at least 30 days before the holding of the General Meeting and must grant the officer in question the opportunity to make an explanation of his or her actions before the resolution is voted on.
(1) When it is recognized that the officer can no longer execute his or her duties due to mental or physical disability.
(2) When the officer in question has committed any misconduct unworthy of an officer, or any other work violation in the course of his or her duties.

Article 10 (Duties of officers)
The joint representatives of the facilitators shall convene facilitators group meetings regularly and carry out the management of the Association with the facilitators in accordance with these regulations.

Article 11 (General Meetings and terms of sessions)
1 The Association will hold an Annual General Meeting once each year. 2 Extraordinary General Meetings will be held in any of the cases indicated below.
(1) In the case that the facilitators group recognizes the necessity for a General Meeting and all the joint representatives of the facilitators have agreed to the holding of a General Meeting.
(2) In the case that a request to call a General Meeting has been submitted in writing in a document, agreed upon by at least one fifth of the total membership, that includes the purpose of the General Meeting, the matters to be discussed and an agenda.
3 The General Meeting will resolve the following matters
(1) Revisions to the Charter
(2) Dissolution of the Association or merger of the Association with another organization or organizations
(3) Activity reports and statements of revenue and expenditure
(4) Other important matters related to management of the Association
4 The term of sessions will be from the first of XXX each year to the last day of YYY of the following year.

Article 12 (Convening of General Meetings)
The convening of General Meetings will be performed by the joint representatives of the facilitators, who must inform the members of the date of the meeting, the location, the purpose and matters to be discussed, and the agenda at least 14 days before the date on which the General Meeting is to be held. Further, in the case of 2(2) of the previous Article, an Extraordinary General Meeting must be convened within 30 days of the request being submitted.

Article 13 (Voting procedures, etc. at General Meetings)
1. A General Meeting cannot be opened unless more than one fifth of the total membership is present.
2. Members who are unable to attend a General Meeting are deemed to be present at a General Meeting if they submit a document that indicates their intentions regarding each of the matters to be discussed and submits a power of attorney letter delegating a representative for voting at the General Meeting (who will be the Chairperson of the General Meeting if no representative is delegated).
3. The Chairperson and Secretary of the General Meeting will be elected from among the members present at the General Meeting.
4. Only matters which members have been informed of in advanced can be voted on at a General Meeting. However, this need not apply to matters that require urgency.
5. Proceedings of the General Meeting are to be determined by a majority of the voting rights of the attendees. In the case of an equal number of votes for and against a resolution, the casting vote shall be made by the Chairperson of the General Meeting.
6. During a General Meeting, minutes that include the following particulars shall be prepared.
(1) Date, time and location of the General Meeting
(2) The total number of members and the number of attendees. (In the case of members voting by power of attorney and their representatives, the numbers of these must be noted.)
(3) Matters discussed.
(4) An overview of the proceedings and the results of resolutions put to the vote.

Article 14 (Accounts and account audit)
1 Necessary expenditures for the management of the Association are provided by donations and so on from members of the Association and members of the general public.
2 One facilitator will be elected at General Meetings to take charge of the accounts and that person will perform the work of managing the Association's assets and accounts.
3 The account facilitator will report on the state of income and expenditures to the facilitators group at regular intervals, and must receive the approval of the facilitators group. The account facilitator must also submit an annual financial report to the General Meeting.
4 The annual financial report must be audited by the account auditor before it is submitted to the General Meeting.
5 The criteria for the election of the account auditor is that the auditor should be a person whom the facilitators group is able to judge as fair and precise. The joint representatives of the facilitators group will then request the person to take the post of auditor.

Article 15 (Revisions to the Charter, dissolution or mergers)
1 The Charter can be revised by a majority vote of members attending a General Meeting.
2. Dissolution or merger of the Association can be executed through a vote on a proposal by the joint representatives of the facilitators at a General Meeting. In the case of dissolution, the joint representatives of the facilitators must also prepare a proposal for the method of disposal of the remaining assets of the Association.

Article 16 (Miscellaneous)
1 Necessary detailed regulations for Article 6 can be executed by stipulating them through approval by the facilitators group.
2 In the case of occurrences of circumstances not provided for in this Charter, these shall be dealt with in accordance with the Companies Act (Law No.86 of July 26, 2005).
3 This Charter shall take force from XX 00, 2016.


Please send the powerof attorney to your lawyers!

In the 4th oral proceedings at the Tokyo District Court on March 23rd, the Chief Judge Asakura abruptly declared the "end of oral proceedings" and it has become clear that the verdict will be handed down on July 13th.

This lawsuit, questioning the concentration of liability under the Compensation for Nuclear Damage (CND) Act, has great social significance and the arguments in the court have caught the attention of the world, but we have not yet completed our presentation of the claims and evidence!

After the verdict, to further present our claims and evidence in court, we will appeal to the High Court on July 27th.
Because of this we would very much like to request that all the plaintiffs to the first trial protest the abrupt ending of the first trial by taking the procedure for becoming a plaintiff to the appeal trial.

The procedure is as follows.
1. Please download 2 of the power of attorney form and example PDFs from down here. (You can choose letter size or A4 size.)

2. Please use the example to fill out and sign both of the power of attorney. Please send 2 forms, one for the high court and the other for the highest court. And send them by post to the address below.

    Overseas Plaintiffs Manager, c
    C/O R-Rights Law Office, 3rd Floor, 3-9-10 Ginza, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0045 Japan

NO FEE whatsoever is charged for plaintiff registration.

Please see the website occasionally for news of the ongoing court battle. English newsletters will be sent to email addresses.

If you have any questions or comments, please contact "".

Please visit Current situation site as well.