Appeal Case Regarding Revocation of Reduction of Public Assistance Standards (2023 (Gyo-Ko) No.5)

This case involves public assistance recipients in Osaka Prefecture who filed an administrative lawsuit against the Japanese government's decision to gradually reduce public assistance standards starting in 2013. The plaintiffs claimed the reduction violated Article 25 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to life, and exceeded administrative discretion. The Osaka District Court initially ruled partially in favor of the plaintiffs, finding the reduction illegal and unconstitutional and ordering its revocation. The government appealed to the Osaka High Court (case number 2023 (Gyo-Ko) No.5). In 2025, the Supreme Court of Japan issued the final ruling, determining that the reduction fell within the government's reasonable discretion and did not violate the Constitution, thereby reversing the High Court's ruling and dismissing all claims.

The Supreme Court of Japan, in its final judgment in 2025, overturned the High Court's finding of unconstitutionality, ruling that the reduction in public assistance standards was within the reasonable scope of administrative discretion, did not violate the Constitution, and dismissed all plaintiffs' claims.

Whether the extent and manner of the 2013 reduction in public assistance standards violated the constitutional guarantee of a "minimum standard of wholesome and cultured living" under Article 25, and whether it constituted an abuse of administrative discretion.

The ruling affirmed a broad scope for administrative discretion in adjusting welfare standards and limited direct judicial intervention for survival rights. It sparked strong criticism from academics and welfare groups, who argued that protections for the most vulnerable were further weakened, while also prompting legislative discussions on the transparency and fairness of the standard-setting process.