Outline of the “Fukushima Collective Evacuation Trial”

※Take action to help children in Fukushima--->Here(Comment) Here(Jury decisions)

Ⅰ About the Conclusion of the Application.
(1) What the Plaintiffs (the 14 children) were calling for:
　The 14 plaintiffs were calling on the City of Koriyama to evacuate them so they can receive education in a safe place, with less than 1mSv/year atmospheric radiation.
(2) What the Defendant (the City of Koriyama) called for:
　For the plaintiffs' application to be rejected

Ⅱ About the reasons for application
1. External exposure to radiation
(1) Claims of the Plaintiffs
a. Estimating based on the figures of atmospheric radiation at the “Koriyama Joint Government Building”, at the 7 schools attended by the plaintiffs,
　1. The total amount of atmospheric radiation between March 12 – August 31 2011 was 7.8－17.16 mSv
　2. the accumulated atmospheric radiation dose in the 1 year since March 12 2011 was 12.7 – 24 mSV
　3. Since the day when the trial was concluded (end of October 2011), more than 1 mSv / year

b. Based on the above, if the residents evacuation standards on the Chernobyl accident decided by the former Soviet Union and three of its successing countries such as Russia were applied to the City of Koriyama, the whole areas around the schools attended by the plaintiffs would have been compulsory relocation areas at the end of October 2011 (see the below contamination map).

(2) Claims of the Defendant (response)
　All “not knowing” (the attitude not to actively argue against yet not to admit the claims of the other party.On the trial, it is regarded as a kind of denial).

(3) Defendant's refutation
refutation 1: According to the results of monitoring of accumulated radiation carried out in June and July 2011 at the schools attended by the plaintiffs, the atmospheric radiation dose is 0.08 – 2 μSV
refutation 2: About the annual estimated exposure to radiation during the time spent at school:
If the time spent at school is 8 hours in one day, for 200 days per year, the estimated annual dose of radiation would be:
0.08 μSV × 8 hours × 200 days = 0.13 mSv
0.2 μSv × 8 hours × 200 days = 0.32 mSv
Either of which are below 1 mSv.

(4) the Plaintiffs' refutation
In response to refutation 1: The integrating dosimeter was held not by the children, but by teachers. While children are outside in the schoolyard, teachers in reality spend more time inside the concrete school building. It means that the monitoring results are not accurate to the radiation children are exposed to.
In response to refutation 2: Taking the reduction coefficient of 0.9 for wooden buildings defined by the Nuclear Safety Commission, and assuming that it takes 1 hour for children to go to school and to leave school, that children don’t leave their houses after returning home,, and that on holiday, they spend 3 hours outside and all other time inside home per a day, the annual exposure to radiation can be estimated at 2.5 – 6.3 mSv. This clearly exceeds 1 mSv/year.

2. Internal Exposure to Radiation
(1) Claims of Plaintiffs
a. It is anticipated that the children of Koriyama where the plaintiffs live are likely to experience the following forms of damage to health as experienced in areas of Chernobyl with the same levels of contamination (according to the opinion report by Katsuma Yagasaki, Emeritus Professor at Ryukyu University).
Where the usual rate of thyroid cancer for children would only be several people in every 100,000;
aa. In 5-6 years the number of thyroid illnesses and goiters suddenly increased, and in 1995 (9 years after the accident) thyroid illnesses were seen at a rate of 1 in 10 children.
ab. Thyroid cancer occurred as just over 10% of thyroid diseases, and 9 years later it occurred at a rate of 13 in 1000 children.
b. Carrying out autopsies following the Chernobyl accident, former director of the Gomel Medical Institute Yury Bandazhevsky measured the levels of Cesium 137 of each internal organ of the deceased. As a result, he noted that the increased occurrence of heart disease in children was a result of highly concentrated accumulations of Cesium 137 in their heart. It is anticipated that as a result of internal exposure to radiation, similar high occurrences of heart disease may be experienced by the children of Koriyama City where the plaintiffs live (The opinion report by Eisuke Matsui, Director, Gifu Environmental and Medical Institute).

(2) Claims of the Defendant (response)
　All “not knowing.”

3. Conclusion
(1) Claims of the Plaintiffs
　Many facts about the damage caused by exposure to radiation are yet not to be defined even by the most advanced science. On the other hand, once damage to health begins to occur, we can’t regain the sufferings. In regards to such a unpredictable and unrecoverable accident like this, the precautionary principle of “protecting when in doubt” must be applied. In the case of children, the future of society, this principle is unconditionally applicable.
Since March 11 2011, the plaintiff's annual atmospheric exposure rate is 12.7-24 mSv, and even in comparison with the evacuation standards for Chernobyl, or the health damage following the Chernobyl accident, it is clear that the defendants have the responsibility to evacuate the plaintiffs.

(2) Claims of the Defendant
a. If the plaintiffs believe that the exposure to radiation is dangerous then they should change schools themselves. The City of Koriyama is not preventing them from changing schools. As long as the plaintiffs have the freedom to change schools, the City of Koriyama is not infringing upon the plaintiffs' rights.
b. While the City of Koriyama is a victim of the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant Accident, and not a perpetrator. The perpetrator is the Tokyo Electric Power Company. Thus, it is not the City of Koriyama, but the Tokyo Electric Power Company, who violated the rights of the plaintiffs.

(3) refutation of the Plaintiffs
　The City of Koriyama has the responsibility to provide children with education in a safe environment according to the Constitution. While the plaintiffs may have the freedom to change schools, this does not excuse the city from the responsibility. Even if the City of Koriyama is a victim of the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant Accident, the City of Koriyama is not excused from this responsibility

Attachment
The map about radioactive contamination