Court ruling in favor of Sri Lankans' right to fair trial finalized

Fair trail? Will it be held in another country?

You'll note that this is sort of a pyric victory for the plaintiffs in that while the Supreme Court has recognized that their Constitutional right to a fair trial was violated, it is not granting them the remedy of actually receiving a fair trial. Instead they are getting a tiny amount of money that won't even cover their lawyer's expenses.

This is unfortunately pretty typical and is a result of the fact that the Courts in Japan have put up a lot of procedural hurdles that make it difficult for people to sue the state for administrative actions that violate their constitutional rights. So in many cases if you want to bring a claim that your rights have been violated (such as, in this case, a state action that prevented you from receiving a fair trial) the most viable procedural option is via a piece of legislation called the State Redress Act, which allows people to sue the State for compensation for violating their legal rights. The Courts haven't put up hurdles to prevent plaintiffs from using that Act, so its become the preferred option for Plaintiffs who are barred from brining other types of legal claims challenging the government. The problem with it though is that, as in this case, the only remedy you can receive is (usually trivial) money, rather than what you really want (the State to do something to remedy its breach of your rights, such as giving you a fair trial).

So YAY! the Supreme Court has actually ruled that the government violated people's rights, but at the same time its ruling doesn't actually fix the problem at all. Its kind of a broken system if you ask me.

Good for Japan, don't waste time and money with long drawn out appeals and pointless court cases only designed to allow the illegal immigrants to stay a little longer.

That illegal procedure will continue forever. Justice is a joke in Japan.

illegal immigrants

Thank God for the accident of birth that treats you differently, eh Kip.

 Its kind of a broken system if you ask me.

Kind of?

One of the plaintiffs, 50, who participated virtually in the press conference from Sri Lanka, said he wanted to go to Japan again and apply for refugee status and that he wanted the authorities to stop illegal deportations.

OK, this guy claimed to need asylum. He was sent back unconstitutionally to Sri Lanka where he ended up doing well enough to not only run a lawsuit, but also hold a press conference and publicly announce he's about to "escape" to Japan again!

How does this guy need asylum?

Which means, the little [insert profanity here] lied!

Maybe people should consider the presence of such people rather than bash Japan on its low refugee acceptance rate.

Which means, the little [insert profanity here] lied!

You are trying to blame it on the victim. That's very inappropriate.

Stick to the topic. The subject is the wrong doing of the immigration agents. The victim didn't do anything illegal.

Excepting for abusing the asylum system by entering a manifestly false claim (and shamelessly proving it)?