Historic Ruling: Japan Court Orders Compensation for Migrants Lured to North Korea Propaganda Scheme
A Tokyo court has issued a landmark ruling, ordering Pyongyang to pay ¥88 million to victims of a decades-old propaganda scheme. Discover why a Japan court orders compensation for migrants lured to North Korea and the ruling's global significance.

Admin
Historic Ruling: Japan Court Orders Compensation for Migrants Lured to North Korea Propaganda Scheme
Jan 27, 2026
Landmark Ruling: Japan Court Orders Compensation for Migrants Lured to North Korea
In a historic and deeply significant decision, a Tokyo court has ordered North Korea to pay ¥88 million (approximately $570,000 USD or £416,000) to four individuals who were tragically deceived and lured to the country decades ago under a false propaganda scheme. This pivotal ruling marks a crucial moment as aJapan court orders compensation for migrants lured to North Koreawith promises of an idyllic life, only to find themselves subjected to harsh realities, including forced labor.
The Deceptive Promise of 'Paradise on Earth'
The plaintiffs in this case shared harrowing accounts of being marketed North Korea as a veritable "paradise on Earth." This extensive resettlement program, spanning from 1959 to 1984, saw over 90,000 Zainichi Koreans (ethnic Koreans residing in Japan) relocate to North Korea. They were enticed by the allure of free healthcare, comprehensive education, and guaranteed employment, envisioning a life of prosperity and comfort.
However, the reality they encountered was a stark contrast to the propaganda. Survivors report being forced into labor in farms and factories, facing severe restrictions on their freedom, and finding themselves unable to leave the country. The dream of a utopian society quickly dissolved into a nightmare of exploitation and control.
A Personal Ordeal: Eiko Kawasaki's Story
Among the brave plaintiffs is Eiko Kawasaki, who, at just 17 years old, embarked on the journey to North Korea in 1960. Her ordeal lasted until 2003 when she finally managed to escape, now at the age of 83. Kawasaki was part of an initial group of five plaintiffs who initiated the lawsuit in 2018 seeking justice and compensation. Though two of the original plaintiffs have since passed away, their families continued to represent their claims in court, ensuring their voices were heard.
A Decades-Long Quest for Justice
The path to this landmark decision has been a long and arduous one. Initially, in 2022, a Tokyo district court rejected the compensation claims, citing issues of Japanese jurisdiction and the expiration of the statute of limitations. However, a significant turning point occurred in 2023 when the Tokyo High Court overturned this decision, affirming that the case indeed fell under Japanese jurisdiction and, critically, found that North Korea had violated the plaintiffs' fundamental rights.
Judge Taiichi Kamino, presiding over the Tokyo District Court, underscored the profound impact of these violations, stating on Monday, "It's not an overstatement to say most of their lives were ruined by North Korea." This statement powerfully encapsulates the suffering endured by the victims.
Symbolic Victory Amidst Enforcement Challenges
While the ruling is undoubtedly hailed as historic, its enforcement presents a formidable challenge. North Korea has consistently ignored the lawsuit for years, and its leader, Kim Jong Un, has not responded to Japanese court summons. Consequently, the court's order for compensation is largely symbolic.
Nonetheless, its significance cannot be understated. Atsushi Shiraki, a lawyer representing the plaintiffs, described the ruling as "historic," noting that it marks the first time "a Japanese court exercised its sovereignty against North Korea to recognise its malpractice." This assertion of judicial authority is a powerful message on the international stage. Kenji Fukuda, another lawyer for the plaintiffs, acknowledged the immense importance of the ruling, even as he realistically conceded that actually obtaining money from North Korea would be a "challenge."
Ultimately, this decision provides a crucial measure of recognition and validation for the victims, offering a ray of hope in their decades-long struggle for accountability and justice, regardless of the practical difficulties in enforcing the financial compensation.