December 7, 2016 Ryukyu Shimpo
On December 6, defense lawyers for the Takae residents hold banners outside Naha District Court in Higawa, Naha City, accusing the court of making an unjust decision on denying a temporary injunction to suspend helipad construction.
In the case 31 Takae residents brought against the Government of Japan concerning helipad construction in the U.S. military’s Northern Training Area (NTA) spanning Higashi and Kunigami Villages, on December 6, the motion for a temporary injunction to suspend construction was denied by the Naha District Court under the presiding judge Kenichi Mori. His reason for the denial was that the residents did not provide enough evidence to convince the court of the illegality of noise and low-frequency sound damage from the helipads after completion.
This is the first judicial ruling made regarding helipad construction itself. Judge Mori pointed out that the Japanese government has taken noise measurements in Takae and identified they are within the estimated noise range from the environmental impact assessment (EIA). Therefore the court acknowledged that the noise is reasonable as specified by the EIA. Since the EIA’s estimated noise levels are lower than environmental quality standards, the court declared it is not possible to say that there is danger of illegal aircraft noise from the helipads.
In regards to Osprey, the noise from takeoff and landing of these aircraft in the N4 Zone falls below the estimated value of the EIA. As such, the court affirmed that even the noise from the takeoff and landing of Osprey is not unreasonable in EIA terms.
Associate Professor Takeshi Tokashiki of the University of the Ryukyus had measurements that showed noise levels exceed environmental quality standards. However, the court found his measurements to be of questionable reliability.
Although the court found there is potential for low-frequency sounds to exceed the EIA’s estimation, it declared that there is not sufficient measurement data to presume that low-frequency sounds are constantly occurring at such intensity. Additionally, the court affirmed that it is inherently difficult to accurately ascertain the degree of harm caused to people’s lives and health by low-frequency waves, and as such it is hard to say whether it is possible for the noise infringe on personal rights and be deemed illegal.
Upon reception of the decision, the Okinawa Defense Bureau (ODB) announced that in order to reduce the base burden reduction on Okinawa it will move forward with the plan to return about 4,000 hectares of the NTA back to Okinawa by the end of the year, and steadily advance construction of the relocation facility. The ODB expects the helipads to be completed by the middle of this month. The ceremony to celebrate the return of the majority of NTA land to Okinawa and the completion of required helipad construction for the return is planned for December 22.
(English translation by T&CT and Erin Jones)
Go to Japanese
Motion for temporary injunction to suspend helipad construction rejected by Naha District Court
December 7, 2016 Ryukyu Shimpo着陸帯差し止め仮処分申請却下 北部訓練場で那覇地裁
2016年12月7日 08:30
那覇地裁がヘリパッド差し止めを却下する決定を出し、不当決定の旗出しをする住民側の弁護団＝６日、那覇市樋川の那覇地裁
東村と国頭村に広がる米軍北部訓練場のヘリコプター着陸帯（ヘリパッド）建設を巡り、東村高江の住民３１人が国を相手に工事の差し止めを求める仮処分申し立てで、那覇地裁（森鍵一裁判長）は６日、ヘリパッド完成後の騒音や低周波音被害の違法性が「十分に疎明されているとは言い難い」として、申し立てを却下した。住民側は決定を不服として福岡高裁那覇支部に即時抗告する方針を示した。
ヘリパッド建設自体について初めての司法判断。森鍵裁判長は、国が高江で実施する騒音測定結果が、環境影響評価での騒音予測の範囲内であると指摘。そのため同評価には「一定の合理性がある」と認定した。同評価の予測値が環境基準を下回っていることから「違法な航空機騒音が発せられる恐れがあるとは言えない」とした。
オスプレイについては、同機が離着陸するＮ４地区の騒音も環境影響評価の予測値を下回っているとして「オスプレイが離着陸するからと言って、同評価の合理性が失われることはない」とした。
環境基準を上回る結果が出たとする渡嘉敷健琉球大准教授の測定結果については、信頼性に疑問を呈した。
低周波音については環境影響評価での予測を超える低周波音の発生可能性を認めた上で「恒常的に強度の低周波音が発生されているとまで推認するには十分な測定結果が蓄積されていない」とした。加えて低周波音自体が生活や健康に与える被害の程度を「的確に把握するのは性質上困難を伴う」として、「人格権を侵害するものとして違法と評価することが可能なものであるとは言い難い」とした。
決定を受けて沖縄防衛局は「沖縄の負担軽減のため、北部訓練場の過半約４千ヘクタールの年内の返還に向けて引き続き、移設工事を着実に進めていく」とのコメントを発表した。今月中旬ごろにはヘリパッドは完成する見通し。ヘリパッド建設を条件とする北部訓練場過半返還の式典は、２２日に予定されている。
英文へ→Motion for temporary injunction to suspend helipad construction rejected by Naha District Court
