[ad_1]
The bill to reform the Infectious Disease Control Law includes the establishment of new criminal penalties for people infected by the new coronavirus. Not only does it lead to restrictions on the “freedom of movement” guaranteed by the Constitution, but it can also turn patients into “criminals.” Concerns remain, as there was a history of human rights abuses and discrimination against patients with infectious diseases.
◆ Criminal punishment for refusing hospitalization measures or escaping from the hospital.
Criminal penalties apply to the refusal of the prefectural governor to take measures of hospitalization or escape from the hospital, imprisonment of up to one year, or a fine of up to one million yen. In the conversations of the ruling and opposition parties, the government presented cases in which patients left the hospital without permission and used the hot spring facilities or went out during accommodation treatment. It maintains that the “final means” (Ministry of Health, Labor Executives and Social Welfare) of application of the sanctions is essential to restrict the conduct.
However, there are many disagreements with the government’s explanation. It does not provide scientific evidence that patients who did not follow hospitalization recommendations spread the infection. The Ministry of Health, Labor and Social Welfare also admits that it has not investigated or tabulated how many cases were subject to criminal penalties throughout the country, and human rights groups and others “do not have facts that justify strong human rights restrictions. Point out.
◆ Bitter Lessons on Leprosy Policy
Behind the spread of revulsion are the bitter lessons of the past regarding infectious diseases. In Japan, a policy of forced isolation of Hansen’s disease patients was implemented before the war, and human rights violations and discrimination were rampant even after the war when treatment was possible.
The Japan Association of Medical Sciences said in a statement that the Infectious Disease Control Act enacted in 1998 after the abolition of the Leprosy Prevention Act “deeply recognizes how it was enacted based on historical reflection” is “responsible. of individual infected persons. ” it is ethically unacceptable to place a burden on them. ”The ruling and opposition parties’ amendment talks will consider eliminating incarceration.
The amendment stipulates that a fine of up to 500,000 yen will be imposed even if a patient refuses to follow the route of infection or gives a false answer. It has been pointed out that the introduction of sanctions will lead to avoiding inspection per se and will be contrary to the objective of increasing the effectiveness of the measures. (Nao Sakata)
