The Constitution Does Not Apply To Foreigners

This appeared in the Tokyo Shinbun yesterday: 重病で生活保護適用を求めたガーナ人の敗訴確定　最高裁が上告棄却、裁判長は反対意見「著しく人道に反する」：東京新聞デジタル https://share.google/00IgzodKxgpi3lyWQ The report is about a man from Ghana who arrived in Japan in 2015 and thereafter was diagnosed with kidney failure. (The article suggests he was allowed into Japan on that basis- or for some health reason- and was not permitted to work- 療養を目的とする在留資格で就労はできない- Why not allow him to work?)) After years of receiving thrice-weekly dialysis treatments, he applied for welfare assistance and was rejected. The man's case eventually made its way to the supreme court, which ruled against him, arguing that the Constitution of Japan guarantees such benefits only to Japanese citizens (not the first such ruling). The author of the majority opinion also opined that he's (a he and former prosecutor) opposed to such an excessive (remarkable, noteworthy, 著しい;) sense of humanitarian (人道) responsibility on the part of the local authority being sued. It's not a simple case: the man was allowed to enter Japan for treatment, apparently, and under what terms is unclear. What is clear is that I could be denied such assistance. I'm not a citizen, true. And I'm not being told I have to pack my bags and leave, like Brits in Sweden. What's common is the shock to the system when you are told your contributions (socially, culturally, economically) to your adopted and adoptive home just don't matter enough.