Photo/Illutration Lawyers representing an escort service that has sought equal eligibility for government aid speak to reporters in Tokyo on June 16. (Yuto Yoneda)

Lawyers and legal scholars blasted a Supreme Court ruling that said excluding sex-industry businesses from COVID-19 relief payments does not violate the constitutional principle of equality under the law.

Upholding lower court rulings, the decision, delivered on June 16, effectively ends a lawsuit filed by an outcall escort service based in the Kansai region and marks the first time the top court has weighed in on the constitutionality of such exclusions.

The ruling said the sex industry, if not properly regulated, could undermine public order and morality, potentially “harming a respectable environment.”

Therefore, the top court said, it was reasonable to exclude escort services from the benefits because such businesses endanger workers’ human dignity and should not be supported with public funds.

A representative of the plaintiff company described the ruling as the worst possible outcome for the industry, adding that it could potentially drive honest businesses out of the sector.

“This decision does not protect our human rights,” the representative said, holding back tears.

The company had applied in September 2020 for 2.96 million yen ($20,000) in pandemic relief grants, including a rent assistance program.

But the government rejected the application.

In the lawsuit, the company argued that it had operated legally under the law and had been unfairly and irrationally excluded from the aid, despite suffering economic losses due to the pandemic.

However, four of the five justices agreed that the government’s decision to deny relief funds to sex businesses was not unconstitutional.

In a dissenting opinion, Chief Justice Mitsuko Miyagawa, a former lawyer, stated that legal sex-industry businesses are distinct from illegal prostitution and that denying aid contradicted the intent of the relief programs.

“There is no rational basis for excluding the sex industry,” she said. “The decision is unconstitutional.”

The plaintiff’s side was also infuriated with the ruling’s argument that the sex industry endangers workers’ human dignity.

The plaintiff emphasized that not all individuals in the sector are forced to work there.

“The dignity of individuals who choose to work in this field of their own free will has been denied by the majority opinion,” said Michiko Kameishi, an attorney for the plaintiff. “It’s infuriating.”

According to police data, more than 33,000 sex industry businesses, including outcall services like the plaintiff, were registered across Japan in 2024.

Yuki Tamamushi, a constitutional law professor at Nihon University, said the top court effectively endorsed the government’s moral judgment that sex work is improper.

“The court’s reasoning that sex work could harm workers’ human dignity is insufficient to justify the ruling,” Tamamushi said.

In contrast, the professor praised Justice Miyagawa’s dissent, saying it offered a persuasive and detailed critique of the unequal treatment and could help spark a broader national debate.

“This case plays a significant role in highlighting how the nation should treat its sex industry,” he said.

Related News