Top court rejects 2 suits on poison gas left in China by Japanese army

Wednesday 27th May, 05:14 AM JST

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

› Login to comment

9 Comments

JoeBigs at 07:25 AM JST - 27th May

poisonous gas munitions left behind by the Imperial Japanese Army in China at the end of World War II.

So that was what in the gyoza last year. 600 years from now there will be a great-great-great-great-great grandchild of a trying to sue Japan over something or other that they claim the Japanese did in WWII........When will China get over the war....
cody7799 at 09:02 AM JST - 27th May

@ JoeBigs: How's about when people stop dying because of it?
pointofview at 10:56 AM JST - 27th May

Of course they rejected it. They were Chinese. This is a par for the course ruling.
franz75 at 11:33 AM JST - 27th May

pointofview: not the same government. couldn't be held responsible.
amerijap at 12:37 PM JST - 27th May

So that was what in the gyoza last year. 600 years from now there will be a great-great-great-great-great grandchild of a trying to sue Japan over something or other that they claim the Japanese did in WWII........When will China get over the war....

This is quite a different issue from tainted gyoza dumplings outbreak. Also, please read the article carefully. Who are the plaintiffs? It's not the Chinese government. Just because the plaintiffs are Chinese does not mean that they are also representing the Chinese government. Why can't they get over the past wartime? Because the JP government has so far failed to make its transparency that is well understood to the victims of war. How could we expect foreign victims to get over the past when the JP government cannot even make its accountability to the Japanese victims in WWII?
OssanAmerica at 04:33 AM JST - 28th May

Individual suits brought against foreign governments for injury/harm/suffering/loss of life a/o property during a war usually don't go very far in any court of law in any country for the siple reason that if courts had to address each and every one of them they could concievavly tie up the global judicial system for the next century and more. This is why governments resolve these kinds of issue between them through biliateral and multipasties treaties. On the other hand it was probably worth filing since these two Chinese plaintiffs had a better chance doing this in a Japanese court than say the relatives of the Tianamen Square massacre suing the Chinese government in a Chinese court.
tasha77 at 02:55 PM JST - 28th May

Ummm maybe because it was a court in japan.....thats why it was rejected....same as the comfort woman......opps they didn't exist did they??? Silly me.
vultor at 09:08 AM JST - 2nd June

When will China get over the war...

When the Japanese govt' and public in general begin to address the matter (Pearl Harbor, Bataan, Nanking, Unit 731, Manchukuo, Laha, confort women, etc.) responsibly; i.e., pretending it never happened, didn't happen that way or their hand was forced and had no other choice.
amerijap at 03:21 PM JST - 6th June

Ummm maybe because it was a court in japan.....thats why it was rejected....same as the comfort woman......opps they didn't exist did they??? Silly me.

Actually, you're making a good point. The length of time period that is long overdue from the event and the government's policy on public memory of its intellectual history usually play out as the key factors in the court decisions. Last year's Supreme Court decision on the lawsuit against NHK over the tainted documentary regarding comfort women is a pretty good example.