Suicide in Japan: Part Six
- Railway Suicides and Compensation Claims

J. Sean Curtin (Fellow, GLOCOM), Earl H. Kinmonth (Professor, Taisho University), Kevin J. Cooney, Ph.D., (Department of Political Science, Arizona State University) and William T. Stonehill (Contributor, NBR Japan Forum)

A full list of articles in this series can be found here.

William Stonehill: I've heard some people say that you should not kill yourself by jumping in front of a train because your family will end up owing a huge amount of compensation to the rail company. Specifically, I have heard someone state that "Japan Railways (JR) will send your family a bill for 100,000 yen for cleaning up the tracks".

Earl Kinmonth: Several years ago, I tried to check on this issue. I did not come up with a definitive answer. I found Japanese newspaper accounts dealing with the issue of compensation claims as well as denials by JR officials that they sought compensation. I did not get around to contacting JR itself. I suspect that there is a small amount of truth and a large amount of urban myth here.

William Stonehill: I certainly agree that this seems to be nothing more than an urban myth.

Kevin Cooney: "Urban myth"? It may very well be an urban myth but I clearly recall an episode about ten plus years ago when I was living in Japan and working on the JET program. One day, a city official came into a meeting late with the excuse that the subway was closed because someone had either jumped or been pushed onto the subway line and that he had to take a taxi instead. There was an immediate ensuing discussion about the battle the family would have to convince the city that it was an accident rather than a suicide in order to avoid being charged for the loss of time and money. These city officials believed that the family of a person who committed suicide on a railway line would be charged for the incident. The reality or "small amount of truth" about this issue may be that this "urban myth" is promoted by transportation officials to discourage people from using the rail lines for committing suicide. Given the prevalence of this "myth" it may be a very effective means in reducing the numbers of suicides involving rail vehicles.

Sean Curtin: Depending on the particular circumstances of the case, railway companies and hotels do actually seek suicide-related compensation from the families of suicide victims. These claims are usually made for such items as damage caused to equipment or furniture, cleanup fees, loss of business and in the case of train operators claims can be made for the cost of transferring commuters to alternative transportation, ticket refunds and other areas where costs have been incurred.

Earl Kinmonth: If large amounts of compensation are regularly sought (and obtained), why is this not more widely publicized? NHK had a prime time special on the disruptions to Chuo Line service caused by suicides and the steps JR was taking to prevent such suicides. I taped the programme and watched it several times. There was no mention of compensation claims.

Sean Curtin: Such legal claims are usually never disclosed or commented on by the companies involved and the issue is rarely covered in the media. Rail companies and hotels say they have no choice but to sometimes pursue financial claims as their businesses often make heavy losses due to suicides and attempted suicides.

Earl Kinmonth: I think there is probably a legal structure that allows railroad companies (not just JR) to make claims against people (or their estates) who disrupt train services. Whether they do so or not is discretionary. Such provision is not peculiar to Japan.

Sean Curtin: You are correct in your assumption. In many countries special railway ordinances govern what action can be taken against people who disrupt railway services. In many cases, those who disrupt services are not trying to commit suicide, but are illegally on the tracks for various reasons.

A full list of articles in this series can be found here.