Overview
- The Supreme Court’s Grand Bench ruled on Feb. 18 that the former Security Business Act clause barring adult guardianship users from guard work violates constitutional guarantees of occupational freedom and equality.
- The court rejected the plaintiff’s damages claim against the state, concluding that prolonged legislative inaction was not established.
- Justices split over when the rule became clearly unconstitutional, with opinions pointing to 2002, 2011, 2013, or around 2016.
- The judgment said the ban had some rationale in 1982 and at the 2002 revision but that later legal and social advances in disability rights undercut blanket exclusions.
- The case involved a Gifu-based former security guard in his 30s who lost his job in 2017 after entering adult guardianship.