Resolution Calling for the Enactment of the "Livelihood Security Act" to Achieve a Society Offering a Safe and Secure Living to All
Article 25 of the Japanese Constitution guarantees the right to life, stating that "All people shall have the right to maintain the minimum standards of wholesome and cultured living," and the public assistance system exists in order to embody this right.
However, despite the fact that Japan’s relative poverty rate is 15.4 percent (with approximately 19 million people living in poverty), only 2.04 million people receive public assistance. This means that merely 10 percent of those in need actually have access to public assistance. Furthermore, non-citizens are not guaranteed the right to life, and those without residence status face inhumane treatment, as they are denied access to even basic medical care.
Even those who receive public assistance are often not guaranteed "the minimum standards of wholesome and cultured living". This is due to repeated reductions in the standard for public assistance. In a lawsuit seeking the revocation of a disposition to reduce the amount of public assistance based on the largest-ever reduction in the standards for public assistance implemented in 2013, the Nagoya High Court agreed to revoke such disposition on November 30, 2023, with the Court ruling that meeting "the minimum standards of wholesome and cultured living," requires more than merely eating three meals a day. Rather, it entails access to a well-balanced diet, having interpersonal relationships with relatives and in the local community, and opportunities to be able to enjoy oneself in some way. In addition to revoking the disposition, the Nagoya High Court also handed down a harsh judgment, ordering the government to compensate the plaintiff for mental suffering, on the grounds that the recipients had been "forced to endure a more severe life for an extended period due to the reduction in the standards for public assistance." Notably, of the 32 court decisions handed down by courts nationwide, more than half (18 courts) have ruled that the reduction in the standards for public assistance was illegal.
In this way, the current public assistance system can hardly be described as a fully functioning safety net that guarantees "the minimum standards of wholesome and cultured living" for "all people".
The underlying causes of the current situation include issues within the public assistance system and broader problems with the social security system, which are both deeply related. The former includes legal and operational problems that undermine the dignity of recipients, such as the use of terms that carry the stigma of "assistance," unlawful or unjust practices at welfare office counters, refusing to accept applications, so-called "waterfront operations" with high hurdles that allow only a small amount of assets to be owned at the start of assistance, inquiries about support from relatives, and the lowering of the standard for public assistance without a rational basis. Meanwhile, the latter involves the problem of the social security system failing to prevent poverty, thereby resulting in an increasing number of people falling into poverty due to a lack of social security support at the previous stage of receiving public assistance. Despite its inherent weakness, the social security system has shifted toward emphasizing "self-responsibility," as the number of low-income earners has increased due to the expansion of unstable employment, and the standard of security was lowered through measures such as stricter selection and/or limitation of recipients based on income restrictions and reductions in pensions (strengthening the principle of selectivism). This reinforced the prejudice that recipients of public assistance were receiving undeserved special benefits. Consequently, the government has intensified its policy of restricting the use of public assistance. This has compounded the issues within the public assistance systems, further violating the dignity of recipients and cultivating strong feelings of aversion to public assistance. As a result, the use of the public assistance system has been further suppressed.
Households with a weak financial base, such as single-parent households (especially single-mother households), elderly households (especially single elderly women households), and households with disabled persons, are perpetually at risk of a minor incident triggering the collapse of their livelihood. In addition, the number of low-paid, unstable non-regular workers continues to rise, adding to a growing number of people who opt for "work styles that do not rely on employment", such as freelancers and gig workers. For these people, however, job loss is directly linked to income loss, and they often fall into poverty immediately. Moreover, even those with regular employment are not insulated from the threat of poverty, as it remains a precarious reality for many. Under these circumstances, where anyone can easily fall into poverty, there is an urgent need to eliminate the factors that cause the dysfunction of the public assistance system, to ensure the right to life for all people living in Japan, and to create a society where everyone can live with a sense of stability.
To achieve this, it is essential to undertake a comprehensive review of the social security system as a medium- to long-term goal, ensuring that everyone has access to the services they need, such as medical care, nursing care, child care, education, and welfare for the disabled, which are fundamental for survival and the preservation of human dignity. It is also necessary to expand the income security system, such as the creation of a guaranteed minimum pension and rent subsidies (housing allowance), and an increase in child allowances. In this way, we must strengthen the universality of the social security system and gradually move toward a society where a broad spectrum of people, including the middle class, recognize the benefits of the system and provide support for each other.
The number of suicides attributed to economic or livelihood problems, especially financial difficulties and debts, saw a sharp rise in 2023, increasing by more than 150% times in just two years. In this situation, where people’s very survival is under constant threat, there is an imperative need to urgently address the legal and operational flaws present in the public assistance system, which is the last bastion for survival, and to provide comprehensive support for human lives and livelihoods. The government plans to further reduce the standards for public assistance in 2025, citing a comparison with the consumption level of the poorest 10 percent of the population as justification; however, this plan is completely unacceptable, especially in the face of the worsening intense heat each year, and the continued rise in prices, including utility costs.
Despite the significant changes in various aspects of our society since 1950, when the current public assistance system was established, Japan’s public assistance system remains largely unchanged, and lags considerably behind those of other developed countries. The Japan Federation of Bar Association (JFBA) published the "Draft Outline for Revision of the Public Assistance Act" on November 18, 2008, followed by a revised version on February 14, 2019. These proposals advocate for amending the Public Assistance Act into a "Livelihood Security Act." In light of subsequent developments, the JFBA once again urges that the present system be amended into the "Livelihood Security Act" with enriched provisions, enabling anyone in need to access the public assistance system, including those who have fallen into temporary poverty. In addition, the JFBA calls on both national and local governments to implement the following measures.
1. Amend the "Public Assistance Act" into the "Livelihood Security Act
The Public Assistance Act should be amended into the "Livelihood Security Act" to include the following provisions:
(1) The title of the "Public Assistance Act" should be changed to the "Livelihood Security Act," and terms such as "recipient" should be replaced with "user," and "assistance" with "benefit," etc., in order to better emphasize and clarify individual rights.
(2) The obligations of the government and registering organizations to promote and publicize the livelihood security system, provide guidance and advice, and study means to improve the coverage rate should all be explicitly outlined;
(3) It should be explicitly stated that all residents of Japan, including non-citizens, fall under the purview of the Livelihood Security Act;
(4) In order to guarantee "the minimum standards of wholesome and cultured living," it should be explicitly stated that the revision of the Livelihood Security Act should be carried out in such a way as to meet the following two criteria: (i) Revision should be conducted by the Diet based on the results of the review by the Council, which has the expertise in the light of the opinions of users, and a methodology should be employed that can be re-examined for its rational relevance to objective data such as statistics; and (ii) Revisions should guarantee expenditures necessary for interaction with the surrounding community, participation in cultural life, and the growth and development of children and adolescents, by adopting a new review methodology that addresses these requirements;
(5) Caseworkers should be classified as welfare professionals, and the maximum number of cases for which each caseworker is responsible should be explicitly specified; and
(6) Each benefit related to education, housing, medical care, and support for self-reliance (employment) should be available independently if one’s income is less than 130 percent of the minimum cost of living.
2. Revise the Relevant Notices of the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare and the Public Notices of the Minister of Health, Labour and Welfare
Without waiting for the legal amendments outlined in the above section 1 to come into effect, the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare should promptly amend its notices and public notices to include the following content:
(1) At the beginning of the assistance, the applicable household should be allowed to retain savings equivalent to six months of minimum living expenses;
(2) Possession of automobiles with low disposal value should be allowed as a daily necessity;
(3) Inquiries regarding financial support from relatives should only be conducted if the applicant expresses a willingness to seek support from the person responsible for support;
(4) University students and similar individuals should be allowed to continue their education while utilizing the public assistance system;
(5) The planned further reduction of the standard for public assistance starting in fiscal year 2025 should be eliminated; and
(6) The standard for public assistance should be raised and an additional summer allowance should be established.
3. Guarantee the Right to Life from the Local Community by Implementing and Sharing Progressive Initiatives by Local Governments
Local governments should take the initiative in improving their own operations and enacting ordinances to realize the purpose of the "Livelihood Security Act", such as enacting ordinances to impose publicity and instructions on local governments, improving the content of their websites and their "Guide to Public Assistance" (guidebooks explaining outlines of the public assistance system for residents), publicizing the same through social media and posters, improving applicant forms and procedures to eliminate violations of the right to apply, and increasing the number of caseworkers and ensuring their expertise. Local governments should also share their progressive initiatives with other municipalities nationwide, and continue to practice the creation of a society in which the right to life is guaranteed for everyone.
The JFBA has been heavily involved in research, proposals and support counseling services related to social security, including public assistance, and we are determined to make every effort to achieve the early realization of the above proposals by further strengthening our initiatives, expanding progressive initiatives from the local level by approaching local governments in cooperation with various professionals and organizations in various regions, and strengthening initiatives to ensure that the judiciary fully fulfills its role as "the bastion of human rights for minorities".
We hereby resolve as set forth above.
October 4, 2024
Japan Federation of Bar Associations