Photo/Illutration Part of the Isahaya Bay, center, has been reclaimed. The Sea of Ariake is seen in the left background beyond a row of dikes. The photo was taken on March 16. (Eiji Hori)

A protracted legal battle over a reclamation project in Nagasaki Prefecture that pitted local fishermen against farmers has been hit by a major turn in the tide.

The Fukuoka High Court on March 25 reversed a finalized 2010 ruling that acknowledged damage done to the fisheries industry and ordered the central government to open floodgates installed in Isahaya Bay for a limited period.

The court concluded that changed circumstances over the past 12 years no longer justify the ruling.

The decision came as no great surprise as the Supreme Court suggested three years ago that the dispute be settled without opening the gates.

However, the verdict is riddled with unconvincing arguments and twisted logic, as if the court engaged in mental gymnastics to follow the top court’s stance.

For instance, the court declared that catches have been increasing in recent years, thereby helping to mitigate damage to the fisheries industry, while noting that the effects on fisheries resources are “still serious.”

And in contrast to its vague assessment of the relationship between the closed floodgates and changing volumes of catches, the court was decisive and emphatic in pointing out the risks of flooding and other damage to farming operations from opening the gates.

Naturally, fishermen were deeply put out that their assertions were dismissed.

The lawsuit has been acrimonious from the outset. Even if future judicial decisions agree on keeping the floodgates closed, the underlying issues have little chance of getting closer to resolution.

The Sea of Ariake, where the Isahaya Bay is located, was once called the “sea of fertility.”

Restoring the natural bounty of the sea is the cherished wish of all those concerned, fishermen and farmers alike. Without revival, there can be no regional development.

The government stance, more than anything else, must be called into question.

The 2010 court order was accepted by the Democratic Party of Japan government, but the party was ousted before any specific plan of action could be set to open the floodgates.

Farmers challenged fishermen by instituting a lawsuit to demand that the floodgates remain closed. The government made no real effort to prove the damage done to the fisheries industry, and the court predictably ruled in the farmers’ favor.

The government played the “victim card,” claiming it was caught between two conflicting obligations, and kept kicking the can down the road, so to speak.

The outcome of years of sitting on the issue resulted in the latest ruling that nullified the finalized 2010 verdict on grounds of “changed circumstances.”

The government risks allowing serious societal moral decay to set in by demonstrating that it is possible to ignore a verdict one doesn’t like and wait it out until noncompliance becomes a done deal.

Last spring, the Fukuoka High Court stated to the effect that “only dialogue can lead to a solution” and proposed setting up a negotiation table without discussing the pros and cons of opening the floodgates.

The fisheries industry was receptive to the idea, but the government refused to consider it.

In explaining its latest decision, the Fukuoka High Court renewed its appeal for the “revival of the Sea of Ariake” and called on all parties concerned, including the government, to strive together for “a comprehensive and unified solution to various issues.”

This came across as an honest admission that the problem has become too complicated to be resolved by the judicial process.

The government shoulders the heavy responsibility of doing everything it can in its public capacity to find a breakthrough, not as the principal of the reclamation project.

--The Asahi Shimbun, March 30

Related News