There was a district court ruling in the case where the Ghanaian plaintiff asked Chiba Prefecture to cancel the denial of the livelihood protection application, which was mentioned in this blog article “Livelihood Protection” (2024/01/16 Plaintiff lost).
The appellate court judgment was handed down by the Tokyo High Court on August 6th, and the plaintiff’s claim was dismissed, just like the first instance judgment.
Japanese government’s position
Although foreigners are not subject to the Livelihood Assistance Act, local governments are currently granting welfare assistance under certain conditions, based on a notification from the Ministry of Health and Welfare (at the time) in 1954.
Furthermore, with the revision of the Immigration Control and Refugee Act in 1990, an oral notice was issued by the former section chief of the Ministry of Health and Welfare, which stated that “this is limited to foreign nationals with qualifications such as permanent residence or long-term residence.”
Supreme Court decision
In July 2014, the Supreme Court ruled that permanent resident foreigners are not included in the scope of the public welfare law.
However, this is a judgment as to whether or not they are subject to the “Livelihood Assistance Act,” and does not mean that foreigners should not be provided with welfare. The operation of giving is carried out by local governments.
Summary
The man in the article changed his residence status from student to work-related status of residence, but due to chronic renal failure, he lost his job, changed his residence status to designated activities (medical stay), and underwent dialysis three times a week (dialysis is only available to wealthy people in his home country).
If a foreign national come to Japan with a work-related status of residence, the general rule is that he/she should return to his/her home country as soon as he/she is no longer able to work, so I think it makes sense that he/she is not be eligible for the protection.
However, as long as he/she works in Japan and pay resident tax and income tax, he/she should be able to receive some benefits from a social welfare perspective, and if there are circumstances such as not being able to receive treatment in his/her home country, I think he/she should receive certain protection.