The Fukuoka District Court's landmark ruling on April 7 that Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi's visits to Tokyo's war-related Yasukuni Shrine are unconstitutional will stand, with the plaintiffs deciding Thursday not to appeal.
The state and the premier, named as the defendants in the suit, are also set not to appeal. The ruling will therefore stand but will not be legally binding as it involves a constitutional matter and was made at the district court level. Only Supreme Court rulings are binding on constitutional matters.
The plaintiffs decided to accept the ruling during a meeting in the city of Fukuoka.
Masaaki Tsuru, who headed the plaintiffs' lawyers in the suit, said the suit fulfilled its goal by obtaining the landmark ruling.
The suit was filed by 211 plaintiffs in the Kyushu region who argued the premier's visit to the shrine on Aug. 13, 2001 violated the constitutional separation of state and religion.
The plaintiffs sought a total of 21.1 million yen in damages from the government, claiming they suffered psychologically as a result of the premier's shrine visit.
Presiding Judge Kiyonaga Kamegawa rejected their demands for compensation, ruling that under the law they have no right to it. But he ruled that the premier's visit constituted a religious activity which violated the separation of religion and state under Japan's Constitution.
Yasukuni Shrine honors 14 convicted World War II Class-A war criminals, including wartime Prime Minister Gen. Hideki Tojo, along with Japanese war dead. China, South Korea and other Asian nations that suffered Japanese military aggression and atrocities regularly protest visits by Japanese leaders to the shrine, which is regarded as a symbol of Japan's past militarism.
Koizumi has visited Yasukuni Shrine every year since he took office in February 2001, prompting stiff protests from China. His latest visit was on Jan. 1 this year.
Similar lawsuits against Koizumi's Yasukuni visits have been filed at five other district courts -- in Tokyo, Chiba, Naha, Osaka and Matsuyama.
The Matsuyama and Osaka district courts rejected the plaintiffs' demands and made no constitutional judgment on the visit. The plaintiffs have appealed.