Date and time: September 5, 2025, from 3:00 PM

Venue: Courtroom 805, Sapporo District Court

Judges: Presiding Judge Yuji Fuse, Judge Saori Miyazaki, Judge Koharu Hatanaka (Civil Division 1, Collegial Section)

Attendees: Plaintiff B (Mr. Sato [pseudonym]), 7 plaintiff attorneys, 2 defendant Eniwa City attorneys, 1 defendant ranch owner

[Future plans]

The next (10th) oral argument date will be Friday, October 17, 2025, from 3:00 p.m. in Courtroom 805 of the Sapporo District Court.

[Contents of the 9th oral argument hearing]

1. Plaintiff B appears in court

This time, as in the previous case, Plaintiff B appeared in court as a party.

2. Submission of each document

On the day of the hearing, the defendant ranch owner submitted a written rebuttal to the plaintiffs’ preparatory briefs (7) and (8).

3. Summary of exchanges held on this date

(1) An additional representative has been appointed to represent the defendant, Eniwa City, bringing the total to two.

(2) The attorney for the defendant, Eniwa City, stated that they have no plans to refute the plaintiffs’ preparatory briefs (7) and (8), but would like to submit a document summarizing the arguments made by both sides so far.

(3) The plaintiffs’ attorneys stated that the outline of their claims has already been submitted, but that they are considering supplementing it somewhat, such as obtaining a medical opinion on the actual conditions of the ranch and the plaintiffs’ dental records.

(4) The court ordered the defendant, Eniwa City,

1) In the reply, page 22, item O, "Regarding the item where the person himself does not know how his pension or wages are managed, there is no confirmation that this applies," does this mean that the person himself knew?

②Also, as a general rule, I think it can be said that in closed environments such as live-in housing, abuse and embezzlement are more likely to occur, but has Eniwa City been publicizing or raising awareness about such things?

These two points were confirmed, and it was decided that the defendant, Eniwa City, would submit a written statement until the next hearing.

(5) The court stated to the plaintiff that, although the complaint states that housing costs and other expenses are deducted from the plaintiff’s wages, it would theoretically be more appropriate to deduct them from the amount of damages awarded. The court then decided that the plaintiff should consider this (although no particular deadline for consideration was set).

We are pleased to report that a progress meeting has been held in the lawsuit over the cover-up of "abuse of persons with disabilities" in Eniwa City.

Date and time: June 2, 2025, from 14:30

Location: Sapporo District Court, Courtroom 303

Judges: Presiding Judge Yuji Fuse, Judge Koharu Hatanaka (Civil Division 1, Panel Section)

Attendance: Plaintiff's four attorneys, Defendant Eniwa City attorney (Defendant Ranch Owner Z participated virtually via telephone)

[Future plans]

The next (9th) oral argument date has been set for Friday, September 5, 2025 at 3:00 p.m. in Courtroom 805.

[Contents of the progress consultation date]

Since both defendants were suddenly absent from the previous (8th) oral argument hearing, we checked the future progress of the case.

1. Defendant Ranch Owner Z

The plaintiffs will submit their rebuttals to the written complaint by the end of June.

2. Defendant: Eniwa City

A statement from defendant ranch owner Z will not be submitted.

The plaintiffs will submit their rebuttals to the written complaint by August 18th.

One more representative will be added.

We are pleased to report that the eighth oral argument hearing in the Eniwa City "disability abuse" cover-up lawsuit has been held.

Date and time: May 13, 2025, from 15:00

Location: Sapporo District Court, Courtroom 805

Judges: Presiding Judge Yuji Fuse, Judge Saori Miyazaki, Judge Koharu Hatanaka (Civil Division 1, Collegial Section)

Attendance: Plaintiff B, 7 plaintiff representatives (Defendant was absent)

[Future plans]

Due to the defendant's sudden absence, a progress consultation meeting will be held in the near future to discuss how to proceed from here on out, and then a date for the next (ninth) oral argument will be set.

[Contents of the 8th oral argument hearing]

1. Defendants absent

Both the defendant Eniwa City representative and the defendant ranch owner Z were suddenly unable to attend due to poor health.

2. Plaintiff B appears in court

This time, as in the previous case, Plaintiff B appeared in court as a party.

3. Submission of each document

The plaintiffs submitted a preparatory brief (9) pointing out that X Farm, which denies the plaintiffs’ status as employees on the premise that it has not paid wages to the plaintiffs, filed workers’ compensation claims against the plaintiff C in 2006 and 2013, and in 2006 filed a workers’ compensation claim for leave of absence as a part-time employee with a monthly salary of 125,000 yen.

4. Summary of exchanges held at this meeting

(1) Due to a change in the judges (the right-hand associate judge and the left-hand associate judge), the arguments were updated.

(2) In relation to the defendant Eniwa City, to which the Plaintiffs had previously submitted a written receipt, the Plaintiffs made a statement in their preparatory document (9).

(3) In relation to defendant Ranch Owner Z, since no receipt for the written preparatory documents had been submitted in advance, the defendant was unable to make a statement in the preparatory documents in accordance with Article 161, paragraph 3 of the Act on Civil Procedure, which provides that in the event of the other party's absence, only the facts stated in the preparatory documents for which a receipt has been submitted may be asserted.

(4) As the defendants were absent, no action was taken on the documents submitted by them.

(5) As the defendants were absent, no evidence was examined.

We are pleased to report that the seventh oral argument hearing in the Eniwa City "disability abuse" cover-up lawsuit has been held.

Date and time: February 21, 2025, from 15:00

Location: Sapporo District Court, Courtroom 805

Judges: Presiding Judge Yuji Fuse, Judge Shiori Nagamine, and Judge Mio Komatsu (Civil Division 1, Collegial Section)

Attendance: Plaintiff B, 7 plaintiff representatives, 1 representative for Defendant Eniwa City, 1 defendant ranch owner

[Future plans]

The next (8th) oral argument date will be on Tuesday, May 13, 2025 from 3:00 p.m. in Courtroom 805 of the Sapporo District Court.

[Contents of the 6th oral argument hearing]

1. Plaintiff B appears in court

This time, as in the previous case, Plaintiff B appeared in court as a party.

2. Submission of documents

(1) The plaintiffs submitted a preparatory brief (7) alleging that a labor contract had been concluded with X Ranch.

(2) The plaintiffs submitted a preparatory brief (8) alleging that the managers of X Ranch had committed abuse and that they were liable for tort.

(3) Defendant Eniwa City’s preparatory briefs (6) and (7) have been submitted.

3. Summary of exchanges held at this meeting

(1) The Plaintiffs have submitted Plaintiffs’ Preparatory Brief (7) and Plaintiffs’ Preparatory Brief (8).

(2) The plaintiffs submitted Exhibits A-32 to A-48 as evidence, and the evidence was examined.

(3) The plaintiffs’ attorneys orally presented in court a summary of the preparatory documents they had submitted.

(4) Defendant Z, the ranch owner, will submit a written response to the plaintiffs’ preparatory briefs (7) and (8) by April 21.

(5) Defendant Eniwa City will prepare statements from defendant ranch operators Y and Z and submit them by April 21st.

We are pleased to report that the sixth oral argument hearing in the Eniwa City "disability abuse" cover-up lawsuit has been held.

Date and time: November 18, 2024, from 15:00

Location: Sapporo District Court, Courtroom 805

Judges: Presiding Judge Yuji Fuse, Judge Shiori Nagamine, and Judge Mio Komatsu (Civil Division 1, Collegial Section)

Attendance: 7 plaintiff attorneys, 1 defendant Eniwa City attorney, 1 defendant ranch owner

[Future plans]

The next (7th) oral argument date will be from 3:00 p.m. on Friday, February 21, 2025, in Courtroom 805 of the Sapporo District Court.

[Contents of the 6th oral argument hearing]

1. Plaintiff B appears in court

This was the first time that the plaintiff (Plaintiff B) appeared in court as a party.

2. Submission of documents

(1) The plaintiffs submitted a preparatory brief (4) alleging that the defendant, Eniwa City, is responsible for the abuse by caregivers under the Act on the Prevention of Abuse of Persons with Disabilities.

(2) The plaintiffs submitted a preparatory brief (5) alleging that the defendant Eniwa City is responsible for not utilizing the “job-parent” system under the Law for Welfare of Intellectually Disabled Persons.

(3) The plaintiffs have submitted a preparatory brief (6) to refute the claims made so far by the defendant, Eniwa City.

(4) Defendant Eniwa City has submitted Defendant Eniwa City Preparatory Document (5).

(5) In relation to defendant ranch operator Z, the agricultural cooperative submitted a response to the application for commission of investigation requesting an investigation of his accounts and a response to the application for commission of investigation requesting the submission of past farming plans. (Note that as these documents relate to the ranch operator, who is a private citizen, they will not be uploaded in light of the purpose of CALL4, which is a crowdfunding site specialized in public litigation.)

3. Summary of exchanges held at this meeting

(1) The Plaintiffs have submitted Plaintiffs’ Preparatory Brief (4), Plaintiffs’ Preparatory Brief (5) and Plaintiffs’ Preparatory Brief (6).

(2) The plaintiffs submitted Exhibit 31 as evidence and an examination of the evidence was conducted.

(3) The plaintiffs’ attorneys orally presented in court a summary of the preparatory documents they had submitted.

(4) The plaintiffs have been required to submit written statements regarding the liability of the ranch operators by February 7, 2025.

(5) Defendant Eniwa City has decided to submit a rebuttal to the preparatory briefs submitted by the plaintiffs by February 7, 2025.

We are pleased to report that the fifth oral argument hearing in the Eniwa City "disability abuse" cover-up lawsuit has been held.

Date and time: September 4, 2024, from 15:00

Location: Sapporo District Court, Courtroom 805

Judges: Presiding Judge Yuji Fuse, Judge Shiori Nagamine, and Judge Mio Komatsu (Civil Division 1, Collegial Section)

Attendance: 7 plaintiff attorneys, 1 defendant Eniwa City attorney, 1 defendant ranch owner

[Future plans]

The next (sixth) oral argument date will be on Monday, November 18, 2024 from 3:00 p.m. in Courtroom 805 of the Sapporo District Court.

This time (the 5th session), following the previous session, no spectator tickets were distributed.

[Contents of the 5th oral argument hearing]

1. Submission of documents

(1) In response to the Request for Clarification (4) submitted by the Plaintiffs at the previous hearing, Defendant Eniwa City submitted a "Response to Plaintiffs’ Request for Clarification (4)" on July 5, 2024, two weeks after the previous hearing.

(2) In response to this, the plaintiffs again submitted a Request for Clarification (5) to the defendant, Eniwa City, on July 29.

(3) Defendant Eniwa City has submitted Defendant Eniwa City Preparatory Brief (3), admitting or denying Plaintiff’s Preparatory Brief (2), and Defendant Eniwa City Preparatory Brief (4), refuting the plaintiff’s preparatory brief and responding to the Request for Clarification (5).

(4) With regard to defendant ranch owner Z, a financial institution submitted a response to the petition for investigation commission requesting an investigation into the accounts used to manage the ranch, which was submitted at the previous hearing. However, the response was terminated in 2011, five years before the incident. (Note that since these documents relate to the relationship with the ranch owner, who is a private citizen, we will not upload them here, in light of the purpose of CALL4, which is a crowdfunding site specialized in public litigation.)

2. Summary of exchanges held at this meeting

(1) Defendant Eniwa City has submitted a “Response to Plaintiff’s Application for Clarification (4)”, Defendant Eniwa City’s Preparatory Brief (3) and Defendant Eniwa City’s Preparatory Brief (4).

(2) Defendant Eniwa City submitted Exhibits B-C-22 to B-C-24 as evidence, and the evidence was examined.

(3) We have decided to have Defendant Z, the owner of the ranch, submit a petition for commission of investigation again after confirming the bank accounts he has used for ranch management since 2011. When a petition for commission is filed in court, it is done in a timely manner.

(4) At the previous hearing, we requested the court to cover the cost of a sign language interpreter at public expense, given that the court had provided one at public expense in the Supreme Court's ruling on the Eugenic Protection Law. As a result of the court's individual and specific consideration of this case prior to the hearing, we received a response that the court would not cover the cost of a sign language interpreter this time. However, we confirmed this again in court.

(5) The plaintiffs are to submit written statements within approximately two months regarding the liability of the defendant, Eniwa City, including what its liability would be if it were a caregiver and what its liability would be under the Law on Welfare of Persons with Intellectual Disabilities.

Since we have made this page public on November 21, 2023, we have received numerous donations, and in about nine months, we were able to reach our initial goal of 1 million yen.

We sincerely thank you all for your support. Thank you very much.

Thanks to your contributions, we were able to visit Eniwa City and surrounding municipalities multiple times, interview those involved, observe the actual conditions of the people with disabilities and the ranch from the perspective of our attorneys, and make adjustments to create a more accessible environment for the parties involved in the trial. Additionally, we could cover the costs of gathering and printing various materials for the trial, which enabled us to carry out more thorough advocacy and disseminate information to a wider audience.

However, the lawsuit is ongoing, and we will need further funds to continue our advocacy efforts and spread awareness of the case to more people.

Therefore, as our next goal, we aim to raise an additional 1 million yen. We kindly ask for your continued support.

We are pleased to report that the fourth oral argument hearing in the Eniwa City "disability abuse" cover-up lawsuit has been held.

Date and time: June 21, 2024, from 15:00

Location: Sapporo District Court, Courtroom 805

Judges: Presiding Judge Yuji Fuse, Judge Shiori Nagamine, and Judge Mio Komatsu (Civil Division 1, Collegial Section)

Attendance: 7 plaintiff attorneys, 1 defendant Eniwa City attorney, 1 defendant ranch owner

【Future plans】

The next (5th) oral argument date will be on Wednesday, September 4, 2024 from 3:00 p.m. in Courtroom 805 of the Sapporo District Court.

This time (the fourth session), spectator passes were not distributed, but as there were more people than could fit in the gallery, it has not yet been decided when tickets will be distributed next time.

[Details of the 4th oral argument hearing]

1. Each written submission

The plaintiffs submitted preparatory documents (2) and (3), as well as Exhibits A-20 to A-30 as evidence. They also submitted a petition for clarification (4) to the defendant, Eniwa City, requesting the submission of the Enforcement Regulations of the Act on Welfare of Persons with Intellectual Disabilities before the amendment of August 15, 2023.

Defendant ranch owner Z submitted a written response to the court's additional questions and a written response to the questions from the plaintiffs. In response to this, the plaintiffs submitted a petition for investigation to the court requesting an investigation into the accounts used to manage the ranch. (Note that since these documents relate to the ranch owner, who is a private citizen, they will not be uploaded in accordance with the purpose of CALL4, which is a crowdfunding site specializing in public lawsuits.)

2. Summary of exchanges held at this meeting

(1) The summary of the preparatory brief (2) that was submitted this time was presented in court for approximately 10 minutes.

(2) Plaintiff’s Preliminary Brief (2) and Plaintiff’s Preliminary Brief (3) were presented.

In their petition for clarification (4), the plaintiffs requested that the defendant, Eniwa City, submit the pre-amendment Eniwa City Intellectual Disability Welfare Law Enforcement Regulations.

(3) The plaintiff submitted Exhibits A-20 to A-30 as evidence, and the evidence was examined.

(4) Defendant Z, the ranch owner, provided written responses to the additional questions posed by the court and to the questions posed by the plaintiffs. There was a back and forth between the defendant and the plaintiff regarding any points in the written responses that were unclear.

(5) In response to the plaintiffs’ petition for clarification (4), it was decided that the defendant, Eniwa City, would check whether or not there were any past bylaws, and if any exist, would submit them within one to two weeks.

(6) The court made a decision on the investigation request to investigate the accounts used to operate the ranch, and it was decided that the investigation request would be carried out promptly.

(7) In light of the recent Supreme Court decision indicating its policy of providing sign language interpreters at public expense in lawsuits related to the so-called Eugenic Protection Law, the plaintiffs requested that a sign language interpreter be provided at public expense in this case as well.

We are pleased to report that the third oral argument hearing in the Eniwa City "abuse of people with disabilities" cover-up lawsuit has been held.

Date and time: March 12, 2024, from 16:00

Location: Sapporo District Court, Courtroom 805

Judges: Presiding Judge Yuji Fuse, Judge Shiori Nagamine, and Judge Mio Komatsu (Civil Division 1, Collegial Section)

Attendance: 7 plaintiff attorneys, 1 defendant Eniwa City attorney, 1 defendant ranch owner

【Future plans】

The next (fourth) oral argument date will be on Friday, June 21, 2024 from 3:00 p.m. in Courtroom 805 of the Sapporo District Court.

Spectator tickets will be distributed.

→ (Updated June 18, 2024) Spectator tickets will not be distributed.

[Contents of the 3rd oral argument hearing]

1. Each written submission

Defendant Eniwa City submitted Defendant Eniwa City Preparatory Document (2) and Exhibits B-C3 to B-C21 as evidence.

Defendant ranch owner Z submitted written responses to the court's questions.

2. Summary of exchanges held at this meeting

(1) Defendant Eniwa City's preparatory brief (2) was presented.

(2) Defendant Eniwa City submitted Exhibits B-C3 to B-C21 as evidence, and an examination of the evidence was conducted (Exhibit B-C14 was excluded from the examination of evidence because it should have been submitted separately as Exhibit B-C20 and Exhibit B-C21).

(3) It was confirmed that during the hearing period, the plaintiff had given notice of litigation to the social welfare corporation that operated the consultation support facility.

(4) Defendant ranch owner Z submitted written responses to the court's questions.

(5) In response to the responses of the defendant ranch owner Z, the court will ask additional questions, and the plaintiffs will also ask questions. The plaintiffs' questions are to be submitted in writing by April 12th.

(6) The plaintiffs are to submit written statements regarding Eniwa City's responsibility by June 12.

We would like to inform you that the second oral argument date for the Eniwa City "abuse of persons with disabilities" cover-up lawsuit has been held.

Date and time: January 30, 2024 from 1:30 p.m.

Venue: Sapporo District Court No. 805

Judges: Chief Judge Yuji Fuse, Judge Shiori Nagamine, Judge Mio Komatsu (Civil Affairs Division 1)

Attendance: 7 plaintiff representatives, 1 defendant Eniwa City representative, 1 defendant ranch manager himself

【Future plans】

The next (3rd) oral argument date will be Tuesday, March 12, 2024, from 4:30 pm in Sapporo District Court No. 805.

Attendance tickets will be distributed.

[Contents of the second oral argument date]

1. Submission of each document

The plaintiff submitted the Plaintiffs' Preparatory Document (1), and the defendant Eniwa City also submitted the Defendant Eniwa City Preparatory Document (1).

Defendant Eniwa City was scheduled to submit Exhibits B C3 to C19 as evidence, but due to procedural deficiencies as described below, the examination of the evidence was postponed to the next time.

In addition, the defendant Eniwa City submitted a notice of lawsuit, claiming that the social welfare corporation that operates the counseling support office will be involved in the lawsuit as an ally of the defendant Eniwa City.

2. Summary of communications on this date

(1) Statements were made in the Plaintiffs' Preparatory Document (1) and the Eniwa City Preparatory Document (1).

(2) The records of the evidence preservation procedures (on-site verification) that the plaintiffs conducted on November 24, 2023 in order to avoid the risk of demolition of the prefabricated hut that became the site were disclosed in court. I did.

(3) Defendant Eniwa City had planned to submit materials from the investigation committee established by Eniwa City as evidence in response to the plaintiffs' request, but the defendant The materials that were believed to have been created by Eniwa City were mixed in, so when the defense team pointed out this fact, the defendant Eniwa City had to check and resubmit the documents, and the examination of evidence was postponed to the next time.

(4) Defendant Eniwa City has denied that ranchers are "users" under the Act on Prevention of Abuse of Persons with Disabilities, citing that ranchers are "foster parents," so to speak, and that plaintiffs are "housework users." However, it has been acknowledged that the terms ``foster parents'' and ``domestic servants'' referred to here are not ``foster parents'' and ``domestic servants'' as defined in the legal terms under the Child Welfare Act and the Labor Standards Act. I did.

(5) The plaintiffs stated that if the defendant Eniwa City were to notify the social welfare corporation that operates the counseling support office, the plaintiffs would also notify the social welfare corporation of the lawsuit.

(6) Since the ranch manager has not yet been able to find a lawyer to represent him, the court has given the ranch manager questions in writing and the ranch owner is to respond by the next time. I did.