武力よりも言論の力～不当な生活保護費減額処分により苦しい生活を強いられた国民

The power of speech rather than military force ～Japanese People were forced to live a difficult life below the minimum guaranteed by the Constitution due to unfair reduction of welfare expenses

寒さの残る３月上旬、愛知県在住の元中日新聞記者で生活保護基準引下げ違憲訴訟に奔走される白井康彦さんが大阪地方裁判所に行く道中、行政書士法人ひとみ綜合法務事務所天王寺支社に、社会保障を主なテーマとする雑誌「賃金と社会保障」を持参頂きました。

In early March, still the cold weather remained, Yasuhiko Shirai, a former Chunichi Shimbun reporter living in Aichi Prefecture who is busy with a lawsuit against the unconstitutionality of lowering welfare standards, stopped by our Hitomi Law office on his way to the the Osaka District Court and brought a magazine “Wages and Social Security” with the main theme of social security.

白井さんの執筆された生活保護の記事や、生活保護基準引下げ違憲訴訟、名古屋高等裁判所判決（令和５年１１月３０日）が掲載されていました。こちらは主文の一部です。

There was an article on welfare written by Mr. Shirai, a lawsuit against the unconstitutionality of lowering the welfare standard, and a judgment of the Nagoya High Court (November 30, Reiwa 5). This is part of the main sentence.

１．原判決を取り消す。
The original judgment is set aside.

２．（略）各控訴人に対してした各保護変更決定処分のいずれも取り消す。
(abbreviated) revoke any of the decisions made against each appellant.

３．被控訴人国は、控訴人３、４及び６ないし１２に対し、それぞれ１万円及びこれに対する平成２５年８月１日から支払い済みまで年５分の割合による金員を支払え。
The appellee State shall pay appellants 3, 4, and 6 to 12 10,000 yen each, and a sum thereof at the rate of 5 per cent per annum from August 1, 2015 until paid.

７．訴訟費用は、第１、２審を通じて、被控訴人らの負担とする。
The costs of litigation shall be borne by the appellees throughout the first and second trials.

この判決は、国に原告（愛知県内の受給者１３人）の請求通り国家賠償を初めて認めるなど、これまでの原告勝訴判決でも見られない多くの特徴があります。

This ruling has many features that have not been seen in previous plaintiff victory rulings, such as granting the government for the first time national compensation as requested by the plaintiffs (13 beneficiaries in Aichi Prefecture).

そのひとつが、『２分の１処理』を徹底的に批判していることです。

One of the characteristics of the ruling is that it thoroughly criticizes the “one-half process”.

国は生活扶助基準の引き下げの理由として、次の２つを主張しています。

The government has argued for the following two reasons for lowering the standard of living assistance.

①について、６０歳以上の単身高齢者世帯の扶助費は居住地の違いなく上がることになった一方、多くの複数人世帯では削減されることになりました。

With regard to (1), the cost of living assistance for single-person elderly households aged 60 and over increased regardless of their place of residence. However, for many multi-person households, living assistance costs have been reduced.

国がこの上げ下げの幅を、一律に半分にしたというのが２分の１処理です。

It is a one-half process that the government has uniformly halved the range of this increase or decrease.

この結果、本来扶助費を上げなければいけない６０歳以上の単身高齢者世帯までデフレ調整の結果ほとんどが減額になってしまったのです。

As a result of the one-half process, most of the single-person elderly households over the age of 60, which should have been raised their support expenses, have been reduced as a result of deflationary adjustments.

（つまり、一番損をしているのは、６０歳以上の単身高齢者世帯ということ！）

(In other words, the most unfair disadvantage is the single-person elderly households over the age of 60!) ）

しかも、この上げ下げ幅が２分の１にされていたことは、２０１３年８月に北海道新聞社が厚生労働省へ情報公開の請求をしても不開示とされ、異議申し立てを経て２年後の２０１５年９月にようやく資料が開示。

Moreover, the fact that this increase and decrease was reduced by one-half was not disclosed even when the Hokkaido Shimbun requested information disclosure to the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare in August 2013, and the materials were finally disclosed in September 2015, two years after an objection.

２０１６年６月１８日の北海道新聞朝刊で報道されるまで、生活保護基準部会のメンバーでさえ知らなかったことだったのです。

This was something that even the members of the Welfare Standards Subcommittee did not know until it was reported in the morning edition of the Hokkaido Shimbun on June 18, 2016.

「取扱厳重注意」の赤字が入った厚労相の内部資料。

An internal document of the Minister of Health, Labour and Welfare with a red word “Handling with strict care”.

場所は、首相官邸。

It took place at the Prime Minister’s Office.

当時の内閣官房副長官で、現在は自民党派閥の政治資金パーティー裏金事件でも注目の世耕弘成氏に、この『取扱厳重注意』の内部資料を提示したのは、２００９年に郵政不正事件で冤罪逮捕された村木厚子社会・援護局長と、古川夏樹保護課長でした。

Hiroshige Seko, then Deputy Chief Cabinet Secretary and now attracting attention in the Liberal Democratic Party faction’s political fund party back money case, was presented with the internal materials of this “Handling Strict Caution” by Atsuko Muraki (who were falsely arrested in 2009 in the postal fraud case), Director General of the Social Affairs and Assistance Bureau at that time, and Natsuki Furukawa, Director of the Protection Division,

国は一連の裁判で、２分の１処理をした理由を、「激変緩和措置」と主張し、正当化しています。名古屋高裁はこれを、ばっさりと切り捨て、さらにダメ押しまで、しました。

In a series of court cases, the government has justified the one-half process by claiming that it was a “drastic change mitigation measure.” The Nagoya High Court dismissed this outright and even pushed it down.

「西尾証人（当時の保護課課長補佐）は、当審における証人尋問で、本件改定に際して、２分の１処理の検討をいつから始めてどのような検討作業を行ったかなどの点につき、現に公にされているものを除いて具体的な回答をしなかったことなどに照らすと、厚生労働大臣が、本件改定を行うに当たり、２分の１処理を、被控訴人（国）らが現在主張しているような激変緩和措置として行うこととするという判断をしていたものであるかについては、非常に疑わしい」

“Witness Nishio (then Assistant Chief of the Protection Division) did not give a specific answer during the examination of witnesses at the trial regarding the question of when he started considering the one-half treatment of this case and what kind of examination work was carried out, except for those that have been made public. It is highly doubtful whether the respondents (the State) would have decided to do so as a measure to mitigate the cataclysmic upheaval as they are now claiming.”

「一般的、抽象的にはよい響きが感じられる『公平』という言葉を使うなどして、実際には『不公平』を残存させていることを取り繕っているものといえる」

“It can be said that the use of the word ‘fairness,’ which sounds good in general and abstraction, is actually correcting the fact that ‘unfairness’ remains.”

「被控訴人国が、指摘を受けるまで、２分の１処理がされていることさえ明らかにしてこなかったことは、これを明らかにした場合に受けざるを得ない一般国民や専門家からの批判等を避けようとしたためであった可能性も十分に考えられるのである」

“It is quite possible that the fact that the appellee State did not even disclose that one-half of the treatment had been done until it was pointed out was because it was trying to avoid criticism from the general public and experts that would have been subject to it if it were to be revealed.”

判決はここまで踏み込めるのかと驚き、裁判長の怒りと覚悟を感じ取れるほどです。

I was surprised that the verdict could go so far, and I could feel the anger and determination of the presiding judge.

敗戦後の日本には、戦災地被災者、引き揚げ者、復員者や失業者など、困窮状態にある人々があふれていましたが、生存権を保障する憲法２５条は、もともとGHQが英文で作成した草案の骨子にはありませんでした。

After the defeat of the war, Japan was full of people in need, such as those affected by the war, those who were repatriated, those who were demobilized, and the unemployed, but Article 25 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to life, was not in the outline of the draft originally prepared by GHQ in English.

修正案の審議、調整が行われる中で、経済学者で社会党の衆議院議員森戸辰男氏の提案で新たに盛り込まれた唯一の規定なのです。

In the midst of deliberations and adjustments to the amendment, it is the only provision that was newly included at the suggestion of Tatsuo Morito, an economist and member of the House of Representatives of the Socialist Party.

一連の裁判で、国は生活保護法第８条に規定された、厚労相の裁量権を理由に、今回の保護基準の引き下げを正当化しているのですが、この裁量権は戦後の異常なインフレに適時に対応するためでした。

In a series of court cases, the government justified the lowering of the protection standard on the grounds of the discretionary power of the Minister of Health, Labour and Welfare stipulated in Article 8 of the Public Assistance Law, but this discretionary power was to respond in a timely manner to the abnormal inflation of the postwar period.

敗戦の混乱の中、日本国憲法を審議する過程で、高い理想を掲げ盛り込まれた憲法２５条の生存権を守ろうと、全国で千名を超える受給者が原告となって闘っています。

In the process of deliberating on the Constitution of Japan in the midst of the chaos of the defeat of the war, more than 1,000 recipients nationwide are fighting as plaintiffs to protect the right to life in Article 25 of the Constitution, which contains high ideals.

こちらは、３月２８日行政書士法人ひとみ綜合法務事務所に届いたジャーナリスト白井康彦さんからのメールです。

This is an e-mail from journalist Yasuhiko Shirai that arrived at Hitomi Law Office on March 28.

物価偽装の事実をあいまいにしてごまかそうとする「デフレ調整実施理由説明偽装」についての白井さんの怒り、この説明偽装を世間にしっかり伝えてほしいというマスコミ・政治家へのお願いを率直に表現されたという説明文をご紹介します。

I would like to introduce Mr. Shirai’s explanatory statement that he frankly expressed his anger at the “falsification of explanations of the reasons for the implementation of deflationary adjustments,” which seeks to obscure the fact of price fraud, and his request to the media and politicians to firmly convey this falsification to the public.

いのちのとりで裁判は、2013年生活扶助基準改定行政処分の取り消しを求めた裁判。基準改定に一番大きな影響を与えたのが「デフレ調整」です。

The lawsuit seeks to revoke the administrative penalty for the 2013 revision of the standard of living assistance. The biggest impact on the revision of the base was the deflationary adjustment.

これは実質的には物価スライドと同じです。

This is essentially the same as the price slide.

物価スライドなので、根拠の物価指数変化率は正しくないと駄目ですが、厚労省が示した物価指数下落率は異様に大きな数字でした。

Since it is a price slide, the underlying rate of change in the price index must be correct, but the rate of decline in the price index indicated by the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare was an unusually large figure.

厚労省が下落率を意図的に大きくする「物価偽装」を実行していたのです。

The Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare was carrying out “price falsification” to intentionally increase the rate of decline.

裁判所に提出される文書や判決文には「物価偽装」というキャッチフレーズはほとんど使われていませんが、実質的には物価偽装の存在が裁判の中で明確になったので、この裁判で「行政敗訴ラッシュ」という異常事態が起きています。

Although the catchphrase “price fraud” is rarely used in documents submitted to the court and in judgments, the existence of price fraud has become clear in practice. This is the reason why there is an abnormal situation called “administrative loss rush” in this trial.

この状況の中で、行政側はデフレ調整について、物価スライドではなかったような説明に完全に切り替えました。

In this situation, the administration completely switched to an explanation of the deflationary adjustment that was not a price slide.

物価偽装という統計不正があった事実を曖昧にするのが狙いでしょう。

The aim is to obscure the fact that there was statistical fraud in the form of price fraud.

この「デフレ調整実施理由説明偽装」という法廷戦術は卑劣です。

This courtroom tactic of “falsifying explanations of reasons for implementing deflationary adjustments” is despicable.

これは、マスコミや国会議員が政権を追及できる話。追及していただかなければ、国民が大きな不利益を受けます。

This is a story that the media and parliamentarians can pursue the administration. If not, the public will be greatly disadvantaged.

真実が世間にしっかり伝わらないのです。そこで、この問題について私がじっくりと解説してみました。

The truth is not well communicated to the world. So, I tried to explain this problem at length.

今、この裁判で政権側が強調しているのは「リーマンショック後に一般世帯の消費は大きく落ち込んだ。それに合わせて生活扶助基準を切り下げた」といった論理です。消費の話であるなら、厚労省はなぜ物価指数を指標にしたのでしょうか？

Now, in this trial, the administration is emphasizing the logic that “consumption by ordinary households fell sharply after the Lehman shock, and the standard of living assistance was lowered accordingly.” If we are talking about consumption, why did the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare use the price index as an indicator?

物価指数は、消費の統計ではありませんよ。 この論理なら、生活保護世帯の実情を無視して基準改定ができてしまいます。それでいいのでしょうか？

The price index is not a statistic of consumption. With this logic, it is possible to revise the standards while ignoring the actual situation of households on public assistance. Is that okay?

生存権の大きさが景気動向で簡単に変わっていいのでしょうか？

Is it okay for the size of the right to life to change easily due to economic trends?

それでいいなら、生活保護基準の原則を記した生活保護法８条に違反してしまうのではないでしょうか？

If that’s okay, wouldn’t it violate Article 8 of the Public Assistance Act, which describes the principles of welfare standards?

生活保護法８条が形骸化してしまうのではないでしょうか？

Won’t Article 8 of the Public Assistance Act become a formality?

統計偽装のオンパレードはもうやめてほしいです。私の物価偽装解説シリーズの動画の中でも、この動画は最高級に「見てもらいたい度合い」が強いです。多くの方が見ていただけるように、勝手ながら、皆様の御支援も期待しております。

I would like to see an end to the on-parade of statistical falsification. Of all the videos in my price fraud commentary series, this video has the strongest “degree of wanting to be seen” at the highest level. We hope for your support so that many people can see it.

裁判の原告の女性にも「動画でアピールする仲間」になってもらいました。その作品が、物価偽装解説シリーズ318「我々がこれだけ勝訴を重ねてきた現実を政治・行政・マスコミは受け止めてほしい（原告・安藤さんと白井の悲痛なアピール）」

We also asked the plaintiff in the lawsuit to become a “friend who appeals through the video.” The work is the price fraud commentary series 318 “I want the politics, government, and the media to accept the reality that we have won so many cases (the heartbreaking appeal of the plaintiffs, Mr. Ando and Mr. Shirai)”

動画の最後の原告・安藤さんの一言は凄かったです。

The words of the plaintiff, Mr. Ando, at the end of the video were amazing.

2013年生活扶助基準改定行政処分の取り消しを求めた「いのちのとりで裁判」。勝訴しにくい行政訴訟で原告側が勝ちまくっています。

In 2013, the “Inochi-no-Tride Trial” sought the cancellation of the administrative penalty for the revision of the standard of living assistance. The plaintiffs are winning administrative lawsuits that are usually verydifficult to win.

裁判を通じて、この基準改定が「統計不正の産物」であることが明瞭になりました。これまでに露見した統計不正の中でも、重大性や悪質性は断トツです。

Throughout the trial, it became clear that this revision of the standards was a “product of statistical irregularities.” Among the statistical frauds that have been exposed so far, the seriousness and maliciousness are by far the most serious.

それなのに、マスコミではほとんど報道されず、国会でも目立つ形では取り上げられていません。

Yet, it has hardly been reported in the media, and it has not been prominently covered in the Diet.

行政側は裁判続行をあきらめるのが正しい態度です。実際には、卑劣な主張を繰り出して必死で防戦しています。

The right attitude for the administration is to give up on continuing the trial. In fact, they are desperately defending themselves by making despicable claims.

この基準改定の主な理由は「デフレ調整」でした。実質的には物価スライドと同じです。行政側も裁判戦の序盤では物価スライドと同様な説明を続けていましたが、途中からは、物価スライドが目的ではなかったような説明に切り替えました。

The main reason for this revision was the deflationary adjustment. In effect, it is the same as the price slide. At the beginning of the trial, the administration continued to explain the price slide in the same way, but in the middle of the trial, it switched to an explanation that was not intended to be a price slide.

厚労省の物価指数計算の内容は酷い。厚労省が物価スライドの指標にした独自の消費者物価指数「生活扶助相当ＣＰＩ」の2008年～2011年の下落率は4.78％です。

The content of the price index calculation by the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare is terrible. The Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW) has used its own consumer price index “CPI equivalent to living assistance” as an index for price slides, and the decline rate in 2008~2011 is 4.78%.

「生活保護世帯の物価が4.78％下がったので生活扶助基準を4.78％切り下げた」という形なのがデフレ調整です。どう見ても物価スライドです。

The deflationary adjustment is in the form of “the standard of living assistance was cut by 4.78% because the price of households on welfare fell by 4.78%.” No matter how you look at it, it’s a price slide.

その根拠の物価指数下落率の大きさは異常であり、私どもは「物価偽装」と追及しています。裁判でも物価の論点は、我々側が行政側を圧倒。そのため、行政側は物価の論点では太刀打ちしにくいと考え、デフレ調整を実施した理由の説明の内容を完全に切り替えたのです。

The size of the decline in the price index on the basis of this is extraordinary, and we are pursuing it as “price fraud.” Even in the trial, the issue of prices was overwhelmingly overwhelming on the administrative side. As a result, the government thought that it would be difficult to compete with the inflation issue, and completely changed the content of the explanation for the deflationary adjustment.

しかし、その説明も実際は偽装工作です。物価偽装を隠蔽するための「デフレ調整実施理由説明偽装」です。今、裁判で行政側が強調している説明は次の論理です。

However, the explanation is actually a deception. It is a “falsification of explanations of the reasons for the implementation of deflationary adjustment” to conceal price fraud. The explanation emphasized by the administration in the trial is the following logic.

「一般世帯の消費は2008年以降、リーマンショックの影響で大きく落ち込んだ。生活扶助基準が据え置かれていたため、生活保護世帯の消費は落ち込まなかった。その不均衡を是正するのがデフレ調整だ」。

“Consumption by ordinary households has fallen sharply since 2008 due to the impact of the Lehman shock. Since the standard of living assistance remained unchanged, consumption by households on welfare did not fall. Deflationary adjustment is the way to correct this imbalance.”

この論理だと、物価指数計算がおかしくてもそれほど問題にはなりにくい雰囲気。物価偽装という事実を曖昧にしようとする「ごまかし工作」です。

With this logic, even if the price index calculation is wrong, it is unlikely to be a problem. It is a “deception” that tries to obscure the fact that prices are being faked.

しかし、この論理だと、「なぜ、物価指数を指標にしたのか」が説明できません。一般世帯と生活保護世帯の消費の不均衡の度合いを示す指標は「消費に関する指標」でなくてはなりません。「物価指数は消費に関する指標」ではないので、科学的に考えれば、この論理で物価指数を指標にするのは完全にアウトなのです。

However, this logic does not explain why the price index was used as an indicator. The indicator of the degree of imbalance in consumption between general households and households on welfare must be “consumption indicators.” Since the price index is not an indicator of consumption, from a scientific point of view, it is completely out of the question to use the price index as an indicator by this logic.

よく考えれば、行政側の苦し紛れの「政策実施理由説明偽装」は「統計不正隠蔽のための手品の論理」と分かるはずです。

If you think about it carefully, you will understand that the government’s painful “falsification of explanations of the reasons for implementing the policy” is “the logic of magic tricks to cover up statistical fraud.”

マスコミや国会議員にこの卑劣な偽装工作をどうしても追及してほしいのです。この悪事が世間にしっかり伝わらなければ、いのちのとりで裁判の長く苦しい裁判闘争はさらに長期化し、我々の仲間は高齢化により、一人また一人と世を去っていくでしょう。

I really want the media and parliamentarians to pursue this dastardly deception. If this evil deed is not properly communicated to the world, the long and painful court battle for life will be prolonged, and our comrades will pass away one by one due to aging.

この動画の最後に発した安藤さんの言葉を記憶していただきたいです。今のままだとどうなるのかを訴えています。「貧乏人は死ね、ということと一緒ですよ」

I would like you to remember Ms. Ando’s words at the end of this video. We are appealing to what will happen if it remains as it is now.
“It’s the same as saying that the poor should die.”

白井康彦さんが長年にわたり訴えている通り、厚生労働省が物価指数下落率を意図的に大きくする「物価偽装」を実行した結果、デフレ調整の名のもとに生活保護費の減額処分が行われた事実は存在しますが、公にはあまり知られていません。

As Mr. Yasuhiko Shirai has been complaining for many years, the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare has deliberately increased the rate of decline in the price index, and as a result, the fact that welfare payments have been reduced in the name of deflationary adjustment has been disposed of, but it is not well known to the public.

行政敗訴が続くという異常事態が起きています。この状況をみれば、不当な生活保護費減額処分を認め、不利益を受けた国民への補填を行うのが行政側の正しい対応だと思うでしょう。でも、実際にはそうはなっていません。

An extraordinary situation has occurred in which administrative losses continue to occur. Looking at this situation, I think that the correct response on the part of the government is to accept the unfair reduction of welfare expenses and compensate the people who have been disadvantaged.

行政側はデフレ調整について、「物価スライドではなかった」という説明に主張を切り替えたのです。まるで、物価偽装という統計不正があった事実を隠蔽するかのようです。

The administration switched its explanation of the deflationary adjustment to saying that it was not a price slide. It is as if they are covering up the fact that there was statistical fraud in the form of price fraud.

行政側の説明で強調されたのが、「リーマンショック後に一般世帯の消費は大きく落ち込んだ。それに合わせて生活扶助基準を切り下げた。」という論理です。

The government’s explanation emphasized that “consumption by general households fell sharply after the Lehman shock, and the standard of living assistance was lowered accordingly.” That’s the logic.

これまでの裁判で、厚生労働省は生活保護費算出に物価指数を指標にしており、物価指数を意図的に操作する「物価偽装」が焦点になっていましたが、ここにきて消費の話にすり替わっていることは、あまりにも苦し紛れです。

In previous court cases, the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare used the price index as an indicator to calculate welfare costs, and the focus was on “price fraud,” which intentionally manipulates the price index, but it is too painful that it has now been replaced by a discussion of consumption.

物価指数は消費の統計ではありません。一般世帯の消費を基準にするのであれば、生活保護世帯の実情を完全に無視して基準改定ができてしまいます。

The price index is not a statistic of consumption. If the standard is based on the consumption of ordinary households, the actual situation of households on welfare can be completely ignored and the standard can be revised.

「最低生活保障水準としての生活保護水準の改善を考える限りにおいては、一般国民の平均的消費水準の動向を追うのみではその目的を達し得ないものであって、低所得階層の消費水準とくに生活保護階層に隣接する全都市勤労者世帯第I・１０分位階級の消費水準の動向に着目した改善を行なうことがとくに必要である。」

“As far as the improvement of the standard of living assistance as the minimum level of living security is considered, it is not possible to achieve this objective by simply following the trend of the average consumption level of the general population, and it is particularly necessary to make improvements focusing on the consumption level of the low-income group, especially the consumption level of the I-10th quartile of all urban working households adjacent to the welfare class.”

社会福祉審議会生活保護専門分科会中間報告（昭和39年12月16日）にあるように、生活保護階層の消費水準に着目する必要があることは過去の議論からも明白なのです。

As stated in the interim report of the Social Welfare Council’s Subcommittee on Public Welfare (December 16, 1939), it is clear from past discussions that it is necessary to focus on the consumption level of the welfare class.

にも関わらず、「一般世帯の消費」のみを根拠にした付け焼刃的な説明を裁判に持ち出すほど、行政側は追い込まれているということでしょう。

Despite this, the government has given a slashing explanation in the judicial arena based solely on the basis of “consumption by ordinary households.” That’s how much the government is being pushed.

「物価偽装」が裁判で明確になった今、他の説明を出すことに何の意味があるのか分かりません。ただ、この悪あがきにより裁判は続くということだけは分かります。

Now that the “price fraud” has been clarified in the courts, I don’t see what the point is in giving other explanations. All we know is that the trial will continue due to this evil struggle.

このまま裁判が続けば、減額された生活保護費で苦しい生活を強いられる人が「現状のまま」生き続けるということになります。

If the trial continues, people who are forced to live a difficult life due to reduced welfare payments will continue to live “as they are.”

人は、時間の経過とともに年を取り、高齢化が進み、いずれ世を去ります。不当な生活保護費減額処分により苦しい生活を強いられた人も一人また一人と減っていくことになります。

People age over time, age and eventually pass away. The number of people who have been forced to live a difficult life due to the unfair reduction of welfare payments will decrease one by one.

国民の命を繋ぐための制度が生活保護制度です。裁判での勝敗より優先すべきことは、「今苦しんでいる人を一日も早く助ける」ことです。

The welfare system is a system that connects the lives of the people. What should take precedence over winning or losing in court is to “help those who are suffering as soon as possible.”

このために「いのちのとりで裁判」は日本中で現在も続いています。2024年2月22日の津地裁の判決で16例目となる勝訴判決が出て、16勝12敗となり、ここ最近は勝訴が続いています。

For this reason, the “Inochi-no-Toride Trial” continues throughout Japan to this day. On February 22, 2024, the Tsu District Court ruled in favor of the case, which was the 16th case, and the team has won 16 and lost 12 cases.

行政側の違法性が明るみになることで、行政側が心を入れ替え、苦しんでいる人を救済するように舵を切ることが期待されています。裁判が続くことは誰も望んでいません。

It is hoped that the revelation of the illegality on the part of the administration will lead the administration to change its mind and steer the course to help those who are suffering. No one wants the trial to continue.

しかし、裁判は続いています。国民の生活を守るのが行政の役目です。行政が、国民に手を差し伸べることなく、保身のために裁判を続けるのであれば、どうすれば行政を改心させることができるでしょうか。

However, the trial continues. It is the role of the government to protect the lives of the people. If the government continues to go to court for self-preservation without reaching out to the people, how can it reform the government?

世論の力が今こそ必要です。全国民が生活保護費減額処分の真実を知り、意見を持てば、政治は動くはずです。

The power of public opinion is needed now. If all citizens know the truth about the reduction of welfare payments and have an opinion, politics will move.

「ペンは剣よりも強し」、1839年に発表されたエドワード・ブルワー＝リットン卿作の戯曲『リシュリュー』に登場するセリフです。

“The pen is mightier than the sword”, is a line that appears in the play “Richelieu” by Edward Bulwer = Lord Lytton, published in 1839.

主人公のリシュリューは17世紀のフランス宰相（国王付きの政治家）で、部下による自分の暗殺計画を知るも枢機卿という聖職者の立場から武器は持てない、ならば、ペンで立ち向かうという意味のセリフです。

The main character, Richelieu, is a 17th-century French chancellor (a politician with the king), and when he learns of his assassination plan by his subordinates, he cannot take up arms because of his position as a cardinal priest, so he confronts him with a pen.

言論の力は武力よりも人々の心に訴える力が強い、という意味もあります。真実が公共の電波で広く報道されることで、人々の心に訴えることができます。真実の報道がなされ、苦しんでいる人が救済される日が一日も早く訪れることを切に願います。

It also means that the power of speech has a stronger power to appeal to people’s hearts than force. When the truth is widely reported on the public airwaves, it can appeal to people’s hearts. It is my sincere hope that the day will come as soon as possible when the truth will be reported and those who are suffering will be relieved.