High court dismisses journalist's claim against Syria travel ban

Presiding Judge Toshimasa Fukami said, "Freedom of travel can be restricted for the sake of public welfare" although it is a basic human right assured by the Constitution.

Ok, while the "state" has the right to place restrictions on it's people, for their own safety and protection, there should be a means which allows the individual to travel where ever they please IF they absolve the state, publicly, from any and all responsibility for their safety and welfare.

If this guy wants to travel to Syria, quite possibly and literally, put his own head on the line, then let him go. Just don't expect any support or assistance from the state, if and or when, you get into trouble.

Other countries have travel bans to certain countries, and people still go there, but knowing so ahead of time that their "country" is absolved from any responsibility to the citizen!

YubaruToday  07:29 am JST

Ok, while the "state" has the right to place restrictions on it's people, for their own safety and protection, there should be a means which allows the individual to travel where ever they please IF they absolve the state, publicly, from any and all responsibility for their safety and welfare.

While in theory I think you're right, in practice it doesn't work that way. Even if the government is legally off the hook they will face public outcry if they take no action whatsoever on those grounds. It can also lead to diplomatic issues so it's really more than just protecting the individual.

Is this the guy we've heard about a couple of times before? If he's in such a hurry to put himself in a dangerous situation that he would sue the government to allow him to do it, then let him go. But have him sign a waiver first that you're not responsible for rescuing his ass.

I think that guy needs a new hobby. He's trying to put others at risk so that he can try to get a Pulitzer Prize

"Freedom of travel can be restricted for the sake of public welfare" although it is a basic human right assured by the Constitution.

The Japanese constitution has less and less value, how can it be restricted if it is a basic human right assured, I think this is a dangerous precedent.

Even if the government is legally off the hook they will face public outcry if they take no action whatsoever on those grounds.

I still remember the last 2 hostages from Japan in Syria who were killed. People were calling for Abe to be removed from office as if he was the one that sent them on a one way ticket to an IS camp. Then suddenly everyone was an expert on how to negotiate with terrorists.

The fact that this photographer is still breathing should make his family sleep better at night I'm sure.

So Abe.co are not only smashing article 9, but also other parts of Japanese legal constitution.

Me thinks, Abe.co controls the media. USA controls Abe.co, so why on earth would Abe.co let a freelance journalist do his or her job, without being under their control? Japan is ranked number 72nd in the whole wide world for press freedom.

This is a worrying precedent and it is easy to see how this could be abused since it sets the bar too low for the government to completely suspend a citizen's ability to travel. If the ministry wants to avoid having reporters go to areas where the JSDF are deployed (like Sudan until recently) they can now easily do so by revoking the passports of reporters who might report critically on the government, citing safety concerns as a formal reason to mask the real one. This is just another arbitrary tool that could potentially be used by the government to supress journalists (who are already too controlled in this country).

Confiscating the passport is a step too far - though the US does it, too: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_movement_under_United_States_law#Restrictions

He's trying to put others at risk so that he can try to get a Pulitzer Prize

I doubt he's looking for a Pulitzer but how is he putting others at risk? If he goes to Syria and if someone lops off his head, who in inaka-ville is at risk? Of the 120,000,000 other Japanese, how many is he putting at risk?

The government isn't going to send their army to save him. The government might ask the nearest embassy to do something, but they aren't going to risk their lives (and pensions) to save him.

Constitution? I guess not