A former security guard who lost his job due to an adult guardianship law is awaiting a judgment from Japan's Supreme Court regarding the constitutionality of a disqualification clause that prohibits those under guardianship from working in the security industry.
The case centers around a male security guard in his 30s from Gifu Prefecture, Japan, who lost his job after he was required to appoint a guardian due to concerns over his decision-making abilities. This man filed a lawsuit against the government claiming that the disqualification stipulation in the security industry law—which states that individuals with guardianship cannot be employed in security roles—violates the Constitution. On January 14, during the Supreme Court hearing, he expressed his frustration over losing his job and described how fulfilling he found his work in the security field since he began in 2014, highlighting the skills he gained through his experiences and mentorship at his job.
This lawsuit raises significant questions about the rights of individuals with disabilities under the adult guardianship system, particularly how legal stipulations can impact their ability to work. The man argues that being forced to leave his position due to this law is unjust, emphasizing that individuals with minor disabilities can still contribute meaningfully to society. The Supreme Court's decision could set a precedent regarding the balance between protecting vulnerable individuals and allowing them to pursue employment without prejudice because of their status.
The anticipated ruling from the Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice Takahiko Imasaki, will address whether the disqualification clause infringing upon the rights of those under guardianships is constitutional. The outcome may have broad implications not just for this individual but also for similar cases in Japan, potentially prompting a reevaluation of laws that govern the employment rights of individuals with intellectual disabilities within various industries, including security.
