Question Sheet No. 49

Questions regarding the SPECIAL PERMISSION FORRESIDENCE to people engaging in the PETITION FOR
RECONSIDERATIONHereby, according to Article 74 of the Parliament Act, I submit the above
mentioned questions.
November 11, 2013
Kazuyuki HAMADATo Mr. Masaaki YAMAZAKI, Speaker of the House of Councilors

Questions regarding the SPECIAL PERMISSION FOR RESIDENCE topeople engaging in the PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATIONThe ‘Guidelines regarding the SPECIAL PERMISSION FOR RESIDENCE’(In the following referred to as the ‘Guidelines’.) were revised in July, 2009.
According to a report by the Asahi Shimbun, ‘cases having been refusedpermission in the past too will be judged according the new policy in case ofreapplication’ (July 10, 2009).
Until now, the SPECIAL PERMISSION FOR RESIDENCE was granted
after the issue of a Deportation Order through the PETITION FOR
RECONSIDERATION
requesting
SPECIALPERMISSIONFORRESIDENCE. Only among cases supported by the Non-Profit Organization
ASIAN PEOPLE’S FRIENDSHIP SOCIETY, the SPECIAL PERMISSION
FOR RESIDENCE was granted to 12 families, 44 people between December,2009 and November, 2011.
However, since 2012, almost no SPECIAL PERMISSION FORRESIDENCE has been granted through the PETITION FOR
RECONSIDERATION. From results of an October, 2013 hearing conductedby APFS among lawyers engaged in cases of foreign nationals andorganizations supporting foreign nationals, it is clear that almost noSPECIAL PERMISSION FOR RESIDENCE has been granted through thePETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION since 2012.
People in application for Refugee Recognition are also included among
those who have a Deportation Order issued against them. Also, on July 6,
2013, 75 Filipino nationals were deported to the Philippines on a charter
flight, contrary to the fact that they were objecting deportation.
In view that while our country’s society keeps its vitality and develops
sustainably, it also borrows vitality from the Asian region, the government
has come up with an active policy for immigration. Hence, I ask thefollowing questions focusing on the implementation of the SPECIALPERMISSION FOR RESIDENCE to people engaging in the PETITION
FOR RECONSIDERATION.

1. Will the SPECIAL PERMISSION FOR RESIDENCE be granted in cases
engaging in the PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION?
2. Can we assume that the Guidelines will apply in cases engaging in thePETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION too?
3. Are there children in cases where the PETITION FOR
RECONSIDERATION has been recognized? If there are, from how old to
how old, what is the range of the children’s age?
4. Disclose the number of cases in which the SPECIAL PERMISSION FORRESIDENCE
wasgranted
through
thePETITIONFORRECONSIDERATION in FY2010, FY2011, FY2012 and FY2013.
5. Can we assume that the positive elements in the Guidelines are taken
into consideration when the SPECIAL PERMISSION FOR RESIDENCE is
granted for conditions requiring SPECIAL PERMISSION FORRESIDENCE after refusal of Refugee Recognition? Clarify the position ofthe government.
6. 75 Filipino nationals were deported on a charter flight on July 6, 2013.
Are there plans for this fiscal year to execute other deportations on charter
flights again? If there are, what are the destinations? Also, disclose thestandards for selecting deportees and that how many people are scheduled
for deportation.

Answer Sheet No. 49

Cabinet Questioning 185 No. 49
November 19, 2013
Shinzo ABE, Prime Minister
To Mr. Masaaki YAMAZAKI, Speaker of the House of Councilors
I am attaching the answer paper for the Questions regarding the SPECIALPERMISSION FOR RESIDENCE to people engaging in PETITION FOR
RECONSIDERATION submitted by Mr. Kazuyuki HAMADA, Member ofthe House of Councilors.

Answer paper for the Questions regarding the SPECIAL PERMISSION

FOR RESIDENCE to people engaging in the PETITION FOR
RECONSIDERATION submitted by Mr. Kazuyuki HAMADA, Member ofthe House of Councilors
On 1., 2. And 5.
Although the ‘PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION’ in question is not alegal process regulated in the Immigration Control and Refugee
Recognition Act (Cabinet Order No. 319 of 1951. In the following referred toas the ‘Immigration Act’.), we are aware of that this factual act (In thefollowing referred to only as the ‘FACTUAL ACT’.) in which foreign
nationals who have a Deportation Order issued against them, including
people who have been refused Refugee Recognition, based on changes ofcircumstances after these measures, request the cancellation of thesemeasures and the SPECIAL PERMISSION FOR RESIDENCE, is referredto as the ‘PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION’.
The ‘Guidelines regarding the SPECIAL PERMISSION FOR RESIDENCE’(In the following referred to as the ‘Guidelines’.), that were established bythe Immigration Bureau, Ministry of Justice in October, 2006 and revisedin July, 2009, are showing the points to be taken into consideration when
the Minister of Justice or the Director of a Regional Immigration Bureau(In the following referred to as the ‘Minister of Justice etc.’), based on the 1stParagraph of Article 50 or the 2nd Paragraph Article 61 2-2 of theImmigration Act, makes a judgment whether to grant the SPECIALPERMISSION FOR RESIDENCE to foreign nationals at his or herdiscretion.
On the other hand, with regard to people engaging the FACTUAL ACT,
while the Minister of Justice etc., in view of circumstances risen after theissue of a Deportation Order, in case if not cancelling this applied measureand not granting residence in our land seem to cause serious humanitarian
problems, may cancel this measure and grant the SPECIAL PERMISSION
FOR RESIDENCE, this judgment, just like the judgment whether to grant
the SPECIAL PERMISSION FOR RESIDENCE based on the 1st Paragraphof Article 50 or the 2nd Paragraph Article 61 2-2 of the Immigration Act, isleft at the discretion of the Minister of Justice etc. However, with regard toforeign nationals who already have a Deportation Order issued againstthem and who are in a position that they should be forced out of our country
in the first place, given the character of the act of cancelling these applied
measures based on circumstances risen later, is left at an even wider rangeof discretion than the judgment whether to grant the SPECIALPERMISSION FOR RESIDENCE based on the 1st Paragraph of Article 50
or the 2nd Paragraph Article 61 2-2 of the Immigration Act, hence we do notthink of applying the Guidelines upon making such judgments.
On 3.
Although there are people who are less than 20 years old among those who
were granted the SPECIAL PERMISSION FOR RESIDENCE after
engaging in the FACTUAL ACT and having cancelled measures of aDeportation Order issue, since we do not have statistics about these people
in the inquired form, it is difficult to answer.
On 4.
Since we do not have statistics about the FACTUAL ACT in the inquired
form, it is difficult to answer.
On 6.
With regard to the inquiry, since there is a risk that it may pose obstacles
for executing deportation duties, we would like to refrain from answering.