Citizen's Network for Japanese-Filipino Children（CNJFC）
Annual Report 2008

<TOKYO OFFICE>
Rm. 206 Nishi-shinjuku High Home, Nishi-shinjuku, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo,
TEL・FAX： 050-3328-0143 E-mail: jfcnet@jca.apc.org
HP (Japanese)：http://www.jca.apc.org/jfcnet<MALIGAYA HOUSE>
18-A Cabezas Street Project 4, Quezon City, Metro Manila, 1109 Philippines
TEL/FAX: (63-2) 913-8913 Email: maligayahouse@gmail.com
1III. Overview of legal advocacy on behalf of JFCs andassistance to JFCs dealing with government procedures provided by the Tokyo office
1. Procedures for case handling
In principle, a case is received directly upon counselingwith a client at the Maligaya House or the Tokyo office. From two years ago for the firsttime, we have also handled cases received at COWDI(Center for Overseas workers inDavao). However, since the staff at COWDI is not yet
usedto these cases, the progress on these cases have beenslow. How to handle suchcases more efficiently in the future is anissue.
In movingthe case forward, first of all, we investigate the locationof the father andways to contact him basedoninformationprovided by theclient. Sources that are usedare addresses andphone numbers provided by the client, operator-assisted number informationservice by NTT,
etc. We may also ask assistance from lawyers.
Whenthe father’s home or office address is known, we senda letter. If we receive no response after sending three letters, we send a certified
letter. If we still receive no response, we ask a volunteer to visit the home or office address. Afterwards, we begin negotiations withthe father
throughthe office, but if the negotiation faces obstacles we ask a lawyer to take the case.
If we cannot locate the father, we attempt to write, call, or visit other contacts, or parents andsiblings of the father, as provided by the client on
the case informationsheet andask for the father’s location.
If the father cannot be locatedafter this procedure or if we findthat the father is economically incapable, etc. uponmeeting him, we may
decide to discontinue the case upon the decisionof the attorneys’ conference whichis held every other month.
2. Case acceptance and status (Table 1 – 3)(1) JFC Network has accepteda totalof 954 cases so far, of which 83 was received duringthe past year (Table 1). Prior to the establishment of
the Maligaya House, cases from the Philippines were basedonreferrals from other NGOs inthat country, but after its establishment (Jan. 1998),
suchcases are exclusively received throughthat office. Two years ago, for the first time, we received a case from COWDI in Davao.

2

Table1: Total Number ofCases (as of Dec. 31, 2008)
Year

Place

Total Discontinued Resolved Attorney

93-95

BS

49

37

10

0

2

96-97

NGO

7

7

0

0

0

96～03

TK

113

57

48

2

6

97～03

MH

479

415

53

7

4

2004

TK

14

6

7

0

1

-

MH

37

21

11

2

3

2005

TK

21

6

10

0

5

-

MH

8

4

0

0

4

2006

TK

27

9

9

4

5

-

MH

23

6

8

7

2

2007

TK

30

3

7

4

16

MH

46

14

7

7

18

COW

17

4

0

3

10

TK

33

0

2

11

20

MH

30

3

0

0

27

COW

20

0

1

0

10

954

592

173

47

133

2008

Total

OfficeNote: BS: Batis Center, MH: Maligaya House, COW: COWDI (Center for Overseas Workers inDavao)
Of the total cases received(945), 62.05% have beendiscontinued.
“Attorneys”, “Office” indicates cases received by the JFC Network duringthat year, referredto attorneys or handledby the office, andare
unresolvedas of the endof last year.
18.13% of the cases have been resolved.

3

(2) Table 2 indicates the number of cases that reachedsome solution amongall cases accepted. For a more detailed analysis of eachitem, referto the followingpages.
Table 2 counts the number of people who reachedthe solution indicated. So, if two childrenof the same mother receivedacknowledgment ofpaternity, it is countedas two incidents of acknowledgment althoughit is a single case for the purposes of case management. Or if the samechild received both acknowledgment of paternity andpayment of alimony, these are countedas incidents under eachcategory. Therefore, thenumber of resolvedcases in Table 1 andthe totalnumber of solutions inTable 2 do not match.
Table2: Status of all cases and cases receivedlast year (unit: persons)
Reported marriage to theAcquisition ofJapanese government

Japanese nationality

Total

57

71

Last year

3

19

Acknowledgement

Payment ofSpecial permission Totalof paternity
alimony

to stay

71

108

41

348

10

7

3

40

(3) Of the total 954 cases that were received, 592 (31 last year) have beendiscontinued by the endof last year (see Table 1). Table 3 indicates thereasons for discontinuance. Cases that were discontinued because the father could not be located, including“No clue as to the father’s location/ lack of information” (36 cases), “Father cannot be located” (148 cases), constitutes 31.08% of the cases that were discontinued.
Other notable cases include cases demanding acknowledgment of paternity or inheritance after the father’s death. 19 suchcases have been
discontinued. Also, cases that have been discontinued because the father is incapable of payingalimony (47 cases) constituted 7.94% of thetotal. Further, cases where the father shows no willingness to pay alimony and discontinueddue to difficulties innegotiation(97 cases)
constitute 16.39% of the total(Table 3). 83 cases (14.02%) have been discontinued because the client lost contact or could not be located. For
cases received inthe Philippines, cases may be difficult to maintainespecially due to the client’s economic situation, etc.
Table3: Reasonsfordiscontinuedcases
AY 2008
Reason for discontinuance

1993-2008

Total

Proportion(%)

Total

Proportion(%)

Will be living as a family / satisfactory relationship

0

0.00

14

2.36

Alimony is already being paid / Direct payment of alimony begun

1

3.23

16

2.70

No information regarding the father / Lack of information

0

0.00

36

6.08

Father could not be located

2

6.45

148

25.00

Accepted monetary payment in the past

0

0.00

3

0.51

4

Request already made (recording of marriage, recording of birth, acquisition of
copy of family registry)

0

0.00

2

0.34

Difficulty in negotiation / No will to pay alimony

0

0.00

97

16.39

By request of the client

8

25.81

43

7.26

Negotiation between the parents

0

0.00

18

3.04

Trouble in understanding the client’s situation / Lack of trust

1

3.23

10

1.69

Client could not be located or contacted

5

16.13

83

14.02

Father incapable of payment

2

6.45

47

7.94

Could not negotiate with the father due to his detention

0

0.00

2

0.34

Referral to other organizations, individuals, attorneys

2

6.45

12

2.03

Could not assist (special permission to stay / acquisition of nationality / other)

2

6.45

8

1.35

Father deceased, could not inherit property or have paternity acknowledged/ no
pension

2

6.45

19

3.21

Deportation of the mother and child

0

0.00

1

0.17

Client / JFC unwilling to pursue their cases

4

12.90

12

2.03

Payment of alimony stopped, no longer willing or capable to pay

0

0.00

6

1.01

Payment of alimony stopped and the father began directly paying it

0

0.00

1

0.17

Payment of alimony stopped and the father could not be located

0

0.00

3

0.51

Payment of alimony stopped and the client cannot be contacted

1

3.23

4

0.68

Payment of alimony stopped, loss of trust with the client, lack of will to continue
the case

0

0.00

2

0.34

Mother and child disappeared while payment of alimony was in progress

1

3.23

1

0.17

Family lacks ability to raise a child

0

0.00

1

0.17

Client does not have economic resources to pursue the application procedure

0

0.00

2

0.34

The mother is not interested in the case (the father is the client）

0

0.00

1

0.17

31

100.00592

100.00TOTAL

5

3. Assistance with government procedures related to marriage (Tables 4 – 7)(1) Of the total cases received (954), 374 (39.20%) involve cases where the parents were married ineither Japanor Philippines as of the time thecase was received. However, 51 cases (13.36%) involved bigamy. Of these, in27 cases (Table 5: 7.22% of cases in which the parents were
marriedwhen the case was received, 52.94% of cases involvingbigamy), marriages withour clients were invalid because they were madeduring an existingmarriage (Philippine Family Law Article 35, Clause 4).
Table4:Maritalstatusofparentsasofthetimethecasewasreceived
StatusMarried

Unmarried

Total

Number

374

580

954

Proportion

39.20%

60.80％

100%

Table5:Cases involving bigamy
The marriage in question

The marriage in question was made duri

Total

was first（valid）

ng an existing marriage（invalid）

Number24

27

51

Proportion among bigamy cases(%)

47.06％

52.94％

100

Proportion among all marriages(%)

6.37%

7.16%

13.60

(2) Avalidmarriage inthe Philippines is also valid under Japanese law, but the marriage will not be recordedinthe Japanese family registry
unless it is reportedto the localgovernment office in Japanwhere the family registry is basedor to the Japanese embassy inthe Philippines.
Subtracting27 cases in which the marriages were invalid under Philippine law because of pre-existingmarriage from the 374 cases inwhichtheparents were marriedwhen the JFC Network received the case, there are 347 cases of validmarriages. Of these, 301 cases (86.74%) were
marriages inthe Philippines. However, in94 of those cases, the marriage was not reportedto the Japanese government andwas not enteredinto the family record under the husband’s name (31.22% of marriages valid under Philippine law). (Table 6, Diagram 1)
The JFC Network reported57 of those marriages to the Japanese government after it receivedthe cases (60.63% of the 94 non-reported cases).
Of these, 1 case was reportedwithin a year of the marriage, and34 cases within5 years of the marriage, constitutinga majority (Table 7).
Last year, we reported3 cases of marriage to the Japanese government. For these cases, a year and 8 months, 6 years and2 months, 16 years
and2 months have passed since the marriage took place. Of these, two were bigamy, but since the marriages withthe clients came first, they
were valid andwe reported them.

6

Table6:Detailsofvalidmarriages（347cases）
Type

MarriedinthePhilippines
NotrecordedinJapan RecordedinJapan

MarriedinJapan

Unknown

Number

94

207

44

2

Proportion

26.86％

59.14％

12.57

0.57

32.22%

68.77%－－

Number301

44

2

Proportion

86.00%

12.57

0.57

Diagram1: Detailsof validmarriages

13%

1%
27%
日本に未届
日本に届出済日本にて婚姻
不明

59%
Table7: Time elapsed betweenmarriageinthe Philippines andreporting to the Japanese government
Time elapsed

Cases

Lessthanayear

１

Morethanayear,lessthan2years

4

Morethan2years,lessthan3years

6

Morethan3years,lessthan4years

7

Morethan4years,lessthan5years

4

Morethan5years,lessthan10years

147Morethan10years,lessthan20years

17

Morethan20years,lessthan30years

2

Morethan30years,lessthan40years

1

Unknown

1
Total

57

(3) As described in (2), there is an extremely large number of cases inwhicha validmarriage inthe Philippines were left unreportedto theJapanese government for a longtime and unrecordedinthe family registry of the husbands. It may be due to the lack of recognition by boththeJapanese husbandand the Filipino wife about the necessity of reportingto the Japanese government. In interviews withthe clients at the Tokyo
office andMaligaya House, most of the Filipino wives lackedknowledge about reportingto the Japanese government.
As described previously, without a report to the Japanese government, marriage remains unrecorded in the family registry of the Japanesehusband. Insuch cases, the husbandmay feel less responsibility towards the wife as time passes, or bigamy may result. Also, the locationof thefamily registry of the Japanese husband is often inaccurately recorded inmarriage certificates issued inthe Philippines. Insuch cases, we try to
trace the locationof the family registry from the current address. But as time passes, it becomes progressively difficult to locate the husband
because of transfer of residence and business addresses. One of the reasons why we couldreport only 57 (60.63%) of the 94 cases in whichmarriages were unreported whenthe JFC network received the case is because the husband cannot be foundafter the lapse of years and it
was impossible to locate his family registry.
To resolve this issue it is important for the Philippines government and the Japanese Embassy in the Philippines to inform pre-wed couples ofthe procedure. As we describe later, of the cases receivedthroughthe Maligaya House, approximately 60% are referred by the Japanese
Embassy. The Embassy therefore knows the seriousness of the problem and should provide anappropriate remedy immediately.
4. Acquisitionof nationality (Table 8 -11)
(1) Overview① 72 childrenacquired Japanese nationality after their cases were received by the JFC Network. Of these, 5 were able to retaintheir nationality
throughtheir wedded parents reportingto the Japanese government withinthree months of their birth(all cases inthe Philippines), 20 acquired
nationality through legitimation (cases in bothPhilippines and Japan), 4 throughacknowledgment of paternity prior to birth(cases inboth
Philippines and Japan), 15 throughreacquisition of nationality (all cases in Japan), 13 through the provisions of the Japanese nationality law prior
to 1984 (all cases inthe Philippines), 3 by reportingof their births (cases in bothPhilippines andJapan), and12 throughacknowledgement ofpaternity after birth accordingto the Supreme Court decisionof June 4, 2008. The 10 childrenwho applied for Japanese nationality together at
the Japanese Embassy inPhilippines onDec.10 is not includedas the results are not yet known.
② Of those who acquirednationality through legitimationlast year (6), two were siblings whose father acknowledged paternity after their birthinthe Philippines andwhose mother appliedfor their nationality while visiting Japan. Another appliedfor nationality at the Japanese Embassy
throughthe Philippines after the mother andthe childwona court decisionregarding paternity after the father's death. In another case, themother and childlived inthe Philippines after the childwas bornthere when the father disappeared. The two came to Japanwiththe assistance8

of acquaintances, wona lawsuit regardingacknowledgement of paternity and thereafter applied for the child's Japanese nationality. Anotherwas born in Japan, but boththe mother andthe child hadoverstayedtheir visas. Because the mother had a Filipino husband, the childwas
presumed to be her husband's, and the Japanese father could not acknowledge paternity on his own. After petitioningto override thispresumption of paternity and a judgment intheir favor, an application for the child's Japanese nationality was made. Another was born in Japan,
but because boththe mother andthe child hadoverstayedtheir visas, the child was placedina children's facility. After the father voluntarily
acknowledged paternity, the childapplied for andwas granted a special permissionto reside in Japan, while the mother returnedto thePhilippines. The 17-year old childacquired Japanese nationality after applyingonown.
③ Of the 12 who acquired nationality through acknowledgement of paternity after birth, 9 were the plaintiffs of the lawsuit demanding
confirmationof Japanese nationality. Of the remaining3, one was a 15 year oldthat receivedacknowledgement from the father voluntarily andacquired Japanese nationality after applyingonown. One was a 19 year oldthat receivedacknowledgement from the father but did not have alegal immigrationstatus. This person appliedfor Japanese nationality before the person's 20thbirthday in December and successfully acquired
it. One other JFC was inthe Philippines while the mother was overstayingin Japan. The father voluntarily acknowledged paternity. Afterwards,
with relatives as guarantors, the child appliedfor a legal immigrationstatus. Aone-year residential visa was granted andthe child came over toJapan, but the mother, the Filipino husband, andchildren bornbetweenthem were arrested for overstayingtheir visas and given deportation
orders. Currently, litigation is underway seekingto cancelthe deportationorder. The child (whose paternity had been acknowledged) was able
to acquire Japanese nationality by immediately applying for it after the Supreme Court decision.
④ The one who was able to reacquire Japanese nationality applied for it after comingto Japanin January, prior to the 20th birthday in July. In
order to reacquire Japanese nationality, there is a residence requirement whichrequire intent to settle in Japan inthe future and also requirethat the applicant had been livingon a long-term visa for at least 6 months. This person hadbeen in Japan for 5 months at the time of
application.
⑤ The one who acquirednationality through a provision applicable to children born before the 1984 revision of the nationality law was a JFC
born inMarch1983 (25 years old at the time of application). The Japanese father had been deceased, the Filipino mother had lost contact, andthe personacquired nationality onown after reportingto the Japanese government.
Table8:DetailsofacquisitionofJapanesenationality
Retentionof
Japanesenationality

Legitima(Unit:persons)Acknowledgementof paternity Reacquisitionof Priortorevision Byreporting birth
Japanesetion

Priorto birth

After birthof nationality

totheJapanese gov Total

nationality

lawernment

Total

5

20

4

12

15

１3

3

72

Last year

0

6

0

12

1

1

0

20

(2) Acquisitionof nationality through legitimation(Article 3, Clause 1 of the Nationality Law prior to the 2008 revision)(a) Illegitimate childrenmay be legitimated by acknowledgement of paternity by the father followed by the marriage of the parents (Article 789,
Civil Code). Accordingto Article 3, Section1 of the Nationality Law prior to the 2008 revision, a child who is a minor and who had been
legitimatedmay acquire Japanese nationality be so reporting to the Japanese government (Article 3, Nationality Law).
9

(b) 49 JFCs (Table 9) had been legitimated(eligible for acquisitionof Japanese nationality) whenthe JFC Network received their cases. Of these,
22 JFCs had already acquired Japanese nationality.
Onthe other hand, of the 27 who didnot have Japanese nationality despite having beenlegitimated, only 10 were able to acquire Japanesenationality after the Network received their cases. The details are as follows.
① Resident in Japanfrom the beginningof the case: 2②The mother and childvisited Japanand appliedfor Japanese nationality after the case was receivedin the Philippines: 4③ The childvisitedJapan and appliedfor Japanese nationality after the case was received inthe Philippines: 1④ The mother resides in Japanwhile the JFC resides inthe Philippines: 1⑤ JFC applied for Japanese nationality at the Japanese Embassy inthe Philippines: 2(c) There are 15 cases in which the childwas legitimated after their cases were receivedby the Network. Of these, 10 acquired Japanesenationality.
Table9 Nationalityofchildrenwhohadbeenlegitimatedbythetimetheircaseswerereceived（unit:persons）
Total

HasJapanese nationality

Does nothaveJapanese nationality

Number of JFCs

49

22

27

Proportion

100%

44.89%

55.10%

Table10 MaritalstatusofparentsofJFCswhohadbeenlegitimatedbythetimetheircaseswerereceived（unit:persons）
MarriedDivorced

HasJapanesenationality DoesnothaveJapanese

HasJapanesenationality DoesnothaveJapanesenationality

nationality
Numberof JFCs

15

14

7

13

Proportion

30.61%

28.57%

14.28%

26.53%

Number29

19

Proportion

59.18%

38.77%

Total

49
100%

10

Diagram 2 Loss of nationality by(d) As describedabove, there are 27 JFCs who had not acquired Japanese nationality whenchildren born from married parents

the JFC Network received their cases, despite their having beenlegitimated. 17 of them
have still not acquired Japanese nationality to this date. All of them involve cases received in

国籍
あり
32%

the Philippines.
The reasonwhy acquisition of Japanese nationality throughlegitimation remains low incases received inthe Philippines involves personal reasons suchas economic situation, butalso structural issues as described below.

国籍
なし
68%

Currently, the local branchoffices of the Department of Justice require that the parents
jointly apply for the acquisitionof Japanese nationality by the child if the parents are married,
basedon the provisionof the Civil Code, Article 818, Clause 3, regarding joint exercise ofparental authority. The Japanese Embassies that are incharge of receiving applications for Japanese nationality abroad also adheres to this view.
But inmost cases, evenwhere the parents are married, the father resides in Japanandcould not be reachedor is unwillingto cooperate withthe mother and child; or is unable to do so because of personal economic situation. It is impossible to gain cooperationfrom such fathers inapplyingfor Japanese nationality at the Japanese Embassy inthe Philippines.
Also, the 19 cases (38.77%) (Table 10) inwhich the parents are divorcedall involve divorces recorded in Japan(there is even a case where thehusbandsubmitted the divorce form without the wife’s permission), since there is no system of divorce inthe Philippines. Because a system ofdesignating who has parentalauthority througha divorce agreement does not exist inthe Philippines, such designationis held invalid. Thus,
despite the fact that the parents are divorced, they are still requiredto jointly exercise parental authority. As described above, it is difficult to gain
the father’s cooperationinsucha situation. Inorder to resolve this situation by grantingthe mother sole parental authority, a judgment by the
court becomes necessary. But the procedure is complex and time and money becomes anobstacle, making it difficult for the mother toacquire sole parental authority. (Incases received inthe Philippines, if the family court renders a decision granting sole parental authority to themother, it will be recognizedas such under the Philippine law too. Thus, the mother will be able to apply for the JFC’s Japanese nationality on her
own.)
Thus there is a situationinwhich children are eligible for Japanese nationality as a result of legitimation, but couldnot do so in reality because of
the obstacles surroundingthe joint exercise of
Table11 ChildrenbornofmarriedparentsandretentionorlossofJapanesenationality

parental authority.
To fundamentally resolve this issue, it is necessaryChildrenbornofmarriedChildrenborninthePhilippinesfrommarriedpa

for the Department of Justice, its local branchoffices,parents(394)

rents(278)andthe Embassy to flexibly adapt to eachcase

BorninJapan Borninthe

HasJapanesePhilippines

nationality

nationality

121

278

88

188

29.95%

70.05%

31.88％

68.12%

DoesnothaveJapanese

11

instead of insistingon the joint exercise of parental
authority. As already described, giventhat most of
the cases received inthe Philippines had beenreferred by the Japanese Embassy, we strongly
wish for a solutionwiththe cooperationof theJapanese Embassy.

(3) Reacquisitionof Japanese nationality(a) Children born of married Japanese parent(s) outside of Japan and acquire a foreign nationality there loses Japanese nationality unless thebirth is reported to the Japanese Embassy or the local government office in Japanwithin three months of birth(Japanese nationality law, Article
12; Family registration law, Article 104).
(b) Of the cases received, 394 were childrenbornof married couples, of which278 (70.05%) were bornin the Philippines. Of those born in thePhilippines (278), 88 (31.88%) had retained Japanese nationality while 188 (68.12%) had lost it (Table 11, Diagram 2). Amongthose who had lost
Japanese nationality, only 15 (7.98%) have beenable to reacquire Japanese nationality so far.
The reasonwhy there are so many cases in which Japanese nationality is lost is because both the Japanese father andthe Filipino mother does
not know about the provision regardingloss of nationality (Nationality Law Article 12) anddo not recognize the importance of reportingto theJapanese Embassy soon immediately after a child is born inthe Philippines. This provision regarding loss of nationality is especially unknownandof a distinctive character. A JFC born in Japan, on the other hand, could acquire Filipino nationality by reportingto the Embassy regardless ofwhether the parents were marriedor unmarried, andregardless of time since the birth. Therefore, informational activities by the Japanese
Embassy are especially important. More fundamentally, there needs to be a revisionof the system of loss of nationality, an extensionof thetime allowedto apply for retention of nationality, or flexibility accordingto the case regarding such application after the cut-off date has passed.
(c ) Also, a child bornof married couples but who do not have Japanese nationality is not recorded in the family registry of the Japanese father.
This creates an imbalance with the fact that a child bornout of wedlock whose paternity has beenacknowledged (even if he or she is of foreign
nationality) is recordedinthe father’s status descriptions. Further, it defeats the purpose of the family registrationwhichis to publicly certify
status relationships, and creates realworld problems suchas the inability to track who is eligible for inheritance, leavingseeds of conflicts.
To eliminate such problems regarding records in the family registry, a reconsiderationof the system of loss of nationality or how it is applied, or
improvements inthe system of family registration, such as recording all births from married Japanese parent(s) regardless of the child’snationality might be necessary.
(d) Achildwho has lost Japanese nationality because the parents hadnot appliedfor retentionof nationality may reacquire Japanese nationality
if resident in Japan(Nationality Law, Article 17, Clause 1). There are 14 cases of applicationfor reacquisition of Japanese nationality (Table 8). In allof these cases, the mother and child came to Japanfrom the Philippines, enteringon a short-term immigrationstatus, andthen residedin Japanafter changing the status to resident status. Alongwith finding a job as a means of living, they petitionedthe family court for the designationof
the mother as havingsole parentalauthority, and after gainingthat designation appliedfor the reacquisition of nationality at the local branch
offices of the Ministry of Justice. Attorneys andthe JFC Network are involvedthroughout the process, with approximately a year required forthe completionof the process for reacquisitionof nationality. Through this we strongly felt the difficulties of reacquiring Japanese nationality.
5. Acknowledgment of paternity (Table 12)(1) Of all the JFCs involved inthe cases we received(this count is larger thanthe number of the cases, which is 954), if we exclude JFCs who wereborn of married parents (394 plus 29 childrenof unmarried parents who had hadpaternity acknowledgedwhenwe receivedthe case),approximately 480 (50-60%) of the JFCs were ina positionwhere they can demandthat the father recognize paternity when the cases werereceived. Yet, of these, only 70 JFCs have been able to have paternity acknowledged by their fathers, including28 through litigationand 6
throughlitigation after the deathof their fathers.
12(2) There are 9 cases in which the father acknowledged paternity last year (see Table 12). The breakdown is as follows.
① Father voluntarily acknowledges paternity: 5② Judgment recognizing paternity after applicationfor court arbitration: 2
One was a case receivedinthe Philippines. The Filipino mother was already deceased, but she had hada baby with a Japanese father while
also in a marriage with a Filipino husband. Because paternity [of the marriedspouse] is assumed by law [in Japan], the Japanese father could not
acknowledge paternity, but his paternity was recognizedthrougharbitration(decisionof the court). The other case was also receivedinthe
Philippines. The Japanese father was a resident in Saga prefecture, so we askeda NGO in Kagoshima for cooperation andsought court
arbitration. The father showed upat the arbitration andagreedto acknowledge paternity, so based onthe Family Arbitration Law, Article 23, adecision based onthe agreement was rendered. The other case was receivedin Japan.
③ Acknowledgement of paternity through litigation: 1
A case received in the Philippines. The father did not show upat the arbitrationand litigationwas pursued.
Table12 Detailsofacknowledgementofpaternity(unit:persons)Acknowledgement Acknowledgementthroughtheof paternity

Voluntary acknowledgement Reporttothe Japanesejudicialprocess

government

Arbitration

Trial

Priorto birth

After birth

Total

71

12

16

5

37

1

Last year

10

3

1

0

6

0

6. Alimony (Table 13)
There are 108 cases inwhichanagreement to pay alimony for the JFC was reached through negotiation withthe father, of which 6 wasreached duringthe past year (Table 13). Onthe other hand, there are 38 cases in which the payment of alimony hadstopped subsequent tothe agreement, andwere discontinued because it couldnot be expectedto resume. There are 4 cases in whichpayment of alimony wasterminated because the children reachedthe age of 20.
Currently, there are 66 cases inwhich the father has beencontinuing to pay alimony, withthe amount varyingcase-by-case, between5000
yenand50000 yen. But there are many cases inwhichthe payment is not steady, and the support provided by the fathers to JFCs is not quitesatisfactory.

13

Table13 Statusofpaymentofalimony
Started Cases

Discontinued

Completed

In progress

93-97

8

2

2

4

98-03

68

33

2

34

2004

4

1

2005

1

2006

7

2007

12

12

2008

6

6

Total

103

3
1

1

6

36

4

66

7. Special permissionto stay (Table 14, 15)(1) Foreigners who are subject to deportation(ImmigrationControl Law, Article 24) because of lack of legal immigration status, etc., will in
principle be placed in deportation proceedings andbe deported(throughthe issuance of a deportation order). However, if the Minister ofJustice finds that there is a specialcircumstance inwhichthe person should be allowedto stay regardless, a special permissionto stay may be
granted. It is considered exceptional, acts of grace, but of the 9355 cases adjudicatedafter an appeal to the Minister of Justice duringannualyear
2007, 79% have been granted special permissionto stay.(SyutsunyukokuKanri Toukei Nenpou, 2008)(2) Of the cases receivedin Japan at the Tokyo office, there are cases in whicheither or boththe mother andthe child do not have legal
immigrationstatus. If the child has Japanese nationality or if the child has had a Japanese father acknowledge paternity, we apply for the special
permissionto stay. So far the number of applications we handled is 46, withits details andthe number of cases inwhichspecial permissionhas
been granted indicatedon Table 12.
In two of the 46 cases, the child had Japanese nationality andthe mother was married, meaningthere were two causes to apply. Therefore
they are counted under both categories. Inanother case, one of the JFC siblings had her Japanese father recognize paternity after her birth,while the other had the same father acknowledge paternity prior to birthand therefore gained Japanese nationality, so it is countedunder bothcategories. Inyet another case, a JFC who hadbeen livingina children’s home apart from the mother had the father acknowledge paternity,
while the mother marriedwithanother Japanese father. Because the reasonfor special permissionto stay canbe considereddifferent for the
JFC and the mother, it is counted under bothcategories. Therefore, the total number of application for special permissionto stay on Table 12 islarger by 4 cases thanthe actual number of applications.
(3) So far, special permission to stay has beengrantedin41 cases (however, as describedabove, in3 cases there were two overlapping causes
for the special permissionto stay, so on Table 14 the total number of permissions is 45.)

14

Of these, 3 had beengranted last year, andthe details are as follows.
① Acase inwhichthe childhas Japanese nationality andthe parents are married: 1
Boththe mother andthe child had overstayed. The Japanese father couldnot acknowledge paternity, because the mother hada Filipino
husbandandwas presumed to be the parent. After petitioning for arbitration regarding paternity anda judgment, the marriage betweenthe
mother and the Filipino husbandwas nullifiedandthe parents married. The child acquiredJapanese nationality throughlegitimation andreceivedspecial permissionto stay after acquiring Japanese nationality.
② Cases inwhichthe family was of foreign nationality: 2(a) Acase involving a Filipino father andchild. The Filipino mother hadleft whenthe child was one and couldnot be located, andthe father
raisedthe child. Because the parents were not marriedit took time to register the child’s birthat the Philippines Embassy, but after reportingto
the ImmigrationBureau, a special permissionto stay was grantedinabout 2 years. At the time of reporting, the childwas 13, or first grade injunior highschool.
(b) Acase involvingthree children born between a Filipino mother andPeruvian father (whenarrested, the first daughter was 12, or sixth grade
inelementary school). After the entire family was arrested, the father was detainedand returned to the country. The mother hada childborn
inmarriage witha Japanese (the childhad lost Japanese nationality). Since the childwas in the Philippines she attemptedto bringthe childto
Japan, but received specialpermission to stay before that.
(4) As for the time it took since reportingto the ImmigrationBureau until a special permission to stay was granted, the most common was
between 2 and3 years, with15 cases (Table 15).
(5) Inmany cases receivedin Japan, the clients lack legal immigrationstatus, and yet the childwas born inJapanandgrowing up inJapan. If theclients continue to seek residence in Japan, it will become necessary to apply for special permissionto stay. Also, since cases for JFCs residingin
Japantendto be easier thancases received in the Philippines interms of negotiatingwith the father or litigationregarding paternity, etc., andapplyingfor acquisition of Japanese nationality, the number of applications for special permissionto stay may increase inthe future.
Table14 Applicationforspecialpermissiontostay--46cases(41cases)
Application
Total

Last year

Permissiongranted
Total

Last year

1Childhas Japanesenationality

13

10

Japanesefather hasacknowledged paternityofthechild

30

29

Parentsaremarried

4

3

1

Familiesofforeignnationality

3

3

1

Note：（ ）is the number of cases in which special permission was granted15

Table15 Timeelapsed sincereporting totheImmigrationBureauuntil special permissionwas granted
Timeelapsed

Cases～1 year9

１-2 years9

2 – 3 years

15

3 –4 years

2

4 years -3

Unknown1

8. Litigationcases (Table 16)(1) So far, there are 131 JFC cases involvingthe judicial process insome manner, suchas arbitrationor litigation. The type of cases andprocedures (arbitrationor litigation) andtheir resolutions are indicatedonTable 16.
Of these, in57 cases the judicialprocess was initiatedwhile boththe mother and the child were inthe Philippines, and38 of them are still inprogress.
(2) Last year, there was one case inwhich the client petitionedfor anarbitrationregarding paternity, and had paternity acknowledged by the
court’s decision inplace of arbitration. This is a case in which the Filipino mother became pregnant with a Japanese manwhile married to a
Filipino husband. The biological father could not acknowledge paternity because of the presumptionof paternity for the JFC. Further, themother had already been deceased and it was difficult to petition for a judgment confirmingthe non-existence of paternity because thehusbandresided in the Philippines. Therefore, the JFC residing inthe Philippines initiated judicial proceedings against the biological father
demanding the acknowledgement of paternity.
Table 16 Status of initiation and resolution of judicial proceedings
Initiated

Decision/ settlement /arbitrationcompleted

In progress

In preparatory
stage

Arbitration

23

21

2

1

Litigation

8

7

1

0

Arbitration

4

4

0

1

Litigation0

Acknowledgement Acknowledgement Arbitration

17

11

6

11

DivorceDemandingconfirmationthat divorce isinvalid16

of paternityof paternity

Litigation

9

8

1

2

Acknowledgement Arbitrationof paternity by
judicialdecree
Litigation

4

4

0

1

Litigation

6

6

0

0

Arbitration

3

2

1

0

Litigation

0

Arbitration

7

6

1

2

Litigation

5

5

0

0

Arbitration

22

16

6

25

Litigation

3

3

0

0

Arbitration

3

3

0

0

Litigation

2

2

0

0

Arbitration

9

9

0

0

Litigation

2

1

1

0

Arbitration

2

2

0

1

Litigation

0

Arbitration

2

1

1

0

Litigation

0

Total

131

111

20

44

Acknowledgementof paternity after
father has been
deceased

Inheritance issues

Demandingconfirmationthat paternity
does not exist

Payment of alimony

Child custody

Designationof parentalauthority

Visitation rights

Marriage expenses

Note: There are cases that involve 2 or more issues.

17