Basis for the Declaration of a Nuclear Emergency:
In Japan, there is a law called the Act on Special Measures Concerning Nuclear Emergency Preparedness, which is outlined as follows:
“Considering the special characteristics of a nuclear disaster involving radiation, this is a Japanese law established to protect the lives, bodies, and property of the citizens. Motivated by the Tokai Village JCO criticality accident on September 30, 1999, it was enacted on December 17, 1999. Particularly, when the Prime Minister issues a nuclear emergency declaration, all authority is concentrated in the Prime Minister, who can directly command not only the government but also local governments and nuclear operators, enabling actions such as disaster prevention and evacuation.” (Source: Wikipedia)
When a nuclear emergency declaration is issued, full authority is delegated to the Prime Minister, with the sole purpose of protecting the lives and property of the citizens.
Following the occurrence of the Fukushima nuclear accident, a nuclear emergency declaration was issued on March 11, 2011.
Excerpts from the Chief Cabinet Secretary’s press announcement are provided below:
“We have convened the Nuclear Safety Measures Headquarters, and today at 4:36 PM, an event falling under Article 15, Paragraph 1, Item 2 of the Act on Special Measures Concerning Nuclear Emergency Preparedness occurred at the Tokyo Electric Power Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station. Recognizing the need to implement emergency measures to prevent the expansion of a nuclear disaster, the nuclear emergency declaration was issued based on the provisions of the said article.”
Reasons for the Inability to Lift the Nuclear Emergency Declaration:
According to Article 15 of the Act on Special Measures Concerning Nuclear Emergency Preparedness, the following description is provided:
“4. When the Prime Minister recognizes that there is no longer a need to implement emergency measures to prevent the expansion of a nuclear disaster after declaring a nuclear emergency, the Prime Minister shall promptly consult the opinion of the Nuclear Regulation Authority (formerly the Nuclear Safety Commission) and make a public announcement (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Nuclear Emergency Declaration Revocation’) to lift the nuclear emergency declaration.”
In other words, there is a provision that stipulates the immediate revocation of the nuclear emergency declaration once it is deemed unnecessary to implement emergency measures for preventing the expansion of a nuclear disaster.
However, as of January 2023, the nuclear emergency declaration has not been lifted.
The situation suggests that the nuclear emergency is still ongoing.
Were you aware of this?
Have the successive prime ministers, who were entrusted with full authority due to the nuclear emergency declaration, acted in accordance with the purpose of the law to protect the lives and property of the citizens?
There is a following international standard.
“International Standards for Protecting People from Radiation – Radiation Protection System of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP)”
According to the the above standard, the radiation exposure for the general public is set to be below 1 millisievert per year during normal times when there is no accident.
However, in the emergency situation caused by the Fukushima nuclear accident, the annual radiation exposure limit for the general public was set at 20 millisieverts or less.
In reality, during evacuation, individuals may be exposed to a significant amount of radiation, surpassing the 1 millisievert per year limit.
(Note: The value of 1 millisievert per year or less is a figure provided by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP), an organization promoting nuclear energy, so it is advisable not to blindly trust its safety. Zero exposure is the ultimate goal.)
The annual limit of 20 millisieverts is a considerably high figure, but it is reluctantly accepted only during the period when the nuclear emergency declaration is in effect.
It must not be interpreted that it is acceptable for the citizens to live continuously in an environment with an annual limit of 20 millisieverts, as long as the nuclear emergency declaration is prolonged.
The normal limit of radiation exposure for the general public should always be kept in mind: 1 millisievert per year or less (with zero exposure as the ultimate goal).
Now, massive amounts of radioactive substances continue to leak from the Fukushima nuclear power plant, and there is no prospect of containment.
It is even impossible to accurately assess the internal conditions of the plant.
The accumulated contaminated water has reached its limit, and ocean discharge has become unavoidable.
Losing international credibility and facing condemnation are inevitable for Japan.
In any case, it is evident that the conditions for lifting the nuclear emergency declaration are not present.
In this regard, I believe the judgments of successive administrations have been correct.
Actions of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) Government under the Nuclear Emergency Declaration:
I’ll reiterate that we are currently under a nuclear emergency declaration.
However, it doesn’t seem like the LDP government is grappling with how to return to normalcy from this state of emergency.
The actions taken by successive administrations seemingly lacking a sense of urgency include:
- Allowing millions of people to reside in areas with high radiation levels equivalent to controlled zones without taking significant measures.
写真（福島原発事故による放射性セシウム土壌汚染） 出典：IPPNW-Report “Health consequences resulting from Fukushima Update 2015”
- Cutting off assistance to evacuees, forcing them to return to areas with high radiation levels.
- Inadequate measurement of radioactive contamination levels, deliberately underreporting the values.
- Narrowing the scope of health surveys to downplay health damage caused by radiation exposure.
- Allowing health surveys and diagnoses only at specific medical institutions and not informing the results to the residents.
- Bidding for the Tokyo Olympics.
- Using Fukushima Prefecture’s agricultural products in school lunches within the prefecture, appealing to their “safety.”
- Permitting corporate entry and new school establishments in contaminated areas.
- No punishment for individuals from the nuclear village, such as Tokyo Electric Power, with compensation costs borne by the public.
- Despite the lack of safety confirmation and the absence of established methods for processing and managing radioactive waste, attempting to restart nuclear power plants nationwide.
- Planning for the construction and export of new nuclear power plants.
- And various other actions…
Summary and Conclusion:
I will repeat once again that we are currently under a nuclear emergency declaration.
However, taking advantage of the fact that many citizens seem to have forgotten, there is a deliberate effort to portray normalcy.
The media also does not point out that we are in a state of emergency.
Moreover, then-Prime Minister Abe, exploiting the concentration of power in himself, ignored the principle of keeping annual exposure below 1 millisievert.
What he did was a policy to repatriate evacuees to areas with an annual exposure of 20 millisieverts or over.
Has he lost touch with human compassion?
Quoting from the disaster preparedness page of the Prime Minister’s Office, “International Standards for Protecting People from Radiation”:
“In normal times, protective measures are planned to ensure that exposure with the potential to cause physical impairment is absolutely prevented. Furthermore, the purpose of radiation protection is to ‘minimize the increase in the risk of future cancer as much as possible.’ Therefore, by managing places dealing with radiation and radioactive isotopes, the exposure of the general public is kept below 1 millisievert per year (public dose limit).”
(Note: The value of 1 millisievert per year or less is a figure provided by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP), an organization promoting nuclear energy, so it is advisable not to blindly trust its safety. Zero exposure is the ultimate goal.)
Conclusion:
The ruling party, the Liberal Democratic Party, does not have the intention to protect the lives and property of the citizens.
An expedited change in government is the correct judgment as voters.
