Silviase/jgov_v1.4_full_ann huggingface dataset:
## Chapter 7 Measures against Illegal or False Foreign Residents in Japan

## Section 1 ◆ Implementation of Measures against Illegal Foreign Residents

## 1 Past Efforts to Reduce the Number of Illegal Foreign Residents

Based on the “Five-Year Plan for Curbing the Number of Illegal Foreign Residents by Half” launched in 2004, each regional immigration bureau has actively promoted various measures, including strict implementation of landing/residence examination, proactive public relations activities regarding illegal employment, strengthened detection by detection officer units, etc., wider application of custody transfer in accordance with Article 65 of the Immigration Control Act, and encouragement of appearance of illegal foreign residents under the departure order system. As a result, the number of illegal foreign residents, which was about 250,000 at the start of the plan, decreased to about 130,000 as of January 2009, and its goal was almost accomplished.

Based on the “Action Plan 2008 for the Realization of a Society Resistant to Crime” aiming to “create a society that generates no illegal foreign residents under the new residency management system”, the Immigration Bureau has continued efforts to further reduce the number of overstayers, which decreased to approximately 67,000 as of January 1, 2012.

## 2 Efforts to Further Reduce the Number of Illegal Foreign Residents

The Immigration Bureau recognizes that the number of illegal foreign residents in Japan has steadily decreased due to past efforts. However, it is estimated that there are still approximately 67,000 overstayers in hiding somewhere in the country, so the bureau is making the following efforts to further reduce the number of illegal foreign residents.

## (1) Strengthened Detection

The Immigration Bureau has established “special detection officer units” that are to engage full-time in detecting offenders of the Immigration Act in the Tokyo Regional Immigration Bureau, Nagoya Regional Immigration Bureau (two units), Osaka Regional Immigration Bureau (two units) and Yokohama District Immigration Office (one unit), which are located in large city areas with many offenders. In addition, the Immigration Bureau has improved the ability to detect illegal foreign residents, and is promoting joint detection by strengthening cooperation with the local police authorities.

However, it has become obvious that illegal foreign residents tend to exist in smaller groups separately in wider areas, and the number of those who are detected at one site has been decreasing over the time. Therefore, the bureau is working to promote efficient detection by making more effective use of information regarding on illegal foreign residents.

## (2) Improvement of Environment for Voluntary Appearance

With the aim of encouraging illegal foreign residents hiding in various parts of the country to
appear at the immigration office voluntarily, the Immigration Bureau is taking the following measures: (i) introduction of the departure order system; (ii) revision of the guidelines on special permission to stay in Japan and publication of such cases; and (iii) conducting more of public relations activities to encourage voluntary appearance at the immigration office.

The departure order system is a system under which illegal overstayers satisfying certain requirements, such as those who appear at the immigration office voluntarily to swiftly leave Japan, are allowed to leave Japan in accordance with simplified procedures without detention, as an exception to the preparatory detention policy. Approximately 4,500 people were allowed to leave the country under this system in 2011 (see Part 1, Chapter 2, Section 2, 5).

On the other hand, “Guidelines on Special Permission to Stay in Japan” which were decided and announced in 2006 were revised in July 2009 in order to increase the transparency of their operation. The revised guidelines show that if illegal foreign residents appear at the immigration office voluntarily, this is considered as a positive factor in the judgment for adjustment of their legal status.

The Immigration Bureau is also taking measures to further publicize the system and the revised guidelines on special permission to stay in Japan by conducting active public relations activities regarding the departure order system, improving environment for voluntary appearance, and aiming to encourage illegal foreign residents to voluntarily appear at the immigration office $ ^{*} $ .

## Section 2 ◆ Implementation of Measures against False Foreign Residents

## 1 Countermeasures against False Foreign Residents, etc

The term “false foreign resident” is referred to as foreign nationals who falsify their status of residence and purpose of stay by forging or illegally alternating documents or abusing fraudulent documents in the form of fake marriages, fake schooling, fake employment, etc., and disguise themselves as if they are staying in the country with legitimate statuses of residence. Countermeasures have become an quite important in immigration control administration, as well as measures against illegal foreign residents. Although they practically appear to be “legal foreign residents” and precise data on their actual number has not been obtained, there is concern over an increase of false foreign residents who choose to falsify themselves as a means to orchestrate entry and stay in Japan.

The existence of false foreign residents abusing the status of foreign residence system cannot be overlooked, and may undermine the foundation of immigration control administration in the country. Therefore, the Immigration Bureau is striving to strengthen countermeasures. The Immigration Bureau makes efforts to strictly respond to foreign nationals falling under the category of grounds of deportation, by revoking his or her status of residence and then making them undergo the deportation procedures.
## 2 Crackdown on False Foreign Residents, etc

## (1) Reinforcement of Collection and Analysis of Information

In order to promote measures against false foreign residents, it is very important to carry out more effective law enforcement at work place such as detections based on well analyzed information.

For that purpose, by making use of information obtained through information exchange with relevant organizations, such as the local police authorities, and information about reports on employment of foreign workers provided by the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare, in addition to a lot of information on illegal foreign residents sent from the public as stated above, the Immigration Bureau is working to find and detect disguised residents, and deal with them strictly.

## (2) Strengthened Detection of Those Engaged in Activities Other than Those Permitted/Strict Response to Those Falling under the Category of Revocation of the Statuses of Residence of False Foreign Residents

When it is found that those who reside in Japan with a status of residence that has a limit to activities, engage solely in work which does not fall under the scope of permitted status of residence granted at the time of entry, they shall be considered to be engaged in activities other than those permitted and are subject to deportation. Therefore, detection of such people has been actively promoted.

The Immigration Bureau makes efforts to strengthen the law enforcement. For example, immigration control officers and immigration inspectors cooperate to conduct investigations to clear up the actual situation. If a foreign national is found to fall under the category of revocation of the status of residence, his or her status of residence will be revoked and then he or she will undergo the deportation procedures.

## 3 Addition of Grounds for Deportation to Correctly Deal with the Furtherance of Illegal Work etc

The following grounds were newly added for the purpose of dealing with the furtherance of illegal work in accordance with the revised Immigration Control Act promulgated in July 2009 and enforced on July 1, 2010.

A. Inducement and accessoryship of behavior including forging or alteration of documents for the purpose of illegal permissions of other foreign nationals

B. Furtherance of illegal work $ ^{*} $

C. Imprisonment or severer punishment due to engagement in activities other than those permitted by the status of residence granted to the foreign national
## Section 3 ◆ Efforts toward Proper Treatment

## 1 Efforts toward More Proper Treatment of Detainees

Based on the agreement reached with the Japan Federation of Bar Associations (JFBA) in September 2010, the Immigration Bureau has jointly made efforts to have discussions on measures to realize better treatment of detained foreign nationals and provide them with legal consultation with attorneys, providing telephone consultation and periodical consultation with dispatched counselors sponsored by bar associations. The bureau will continue discussions with JFBA into the future for further cooperations.

With regard to the detained foreign nationals to whom deportation orders have been issued but who are detained for a significantly long term, directors of detention centers or director-generals of regional immigration bureaus verify and review the necessity and reason of provisional release periodically, thereby trying to prevent foreign nationals from being detained for a long term through flexible application of the provisional release system.

Furthermore, while taking into consideration the circumstances of individual facilities, the number of hours for open treatment is extended or opportunities for detained foreign nationals to engage in outdoor activities or take a bath are increased to the extent allowable in terms of security. In addition, with the cooperation of JFBA, periodical medical checks by visiting psychiatrists were commenced in June 2011 at the Higashi-Nihon Immigration Center and in February 2012 at the Nishi-Nihon Immigration Center. The Immigration Bureau has thus been making efforts for proper treatment of detainee with consideration to their human rights.

### 2 Activities, etc., of the Immigration Detention Facilities Visiting Committee

There are 23 immigration detention centers and departure standby facilities, which should be inspected by the Immigration Detention Facilities Visiting Committee. Duties to inspect such facilities and interview detainees are shared by each committee established in the Tokyo Regional Immigration Bureau and the Osaka Regional Immigration Bureau. Based on the results, each committee submits an opinion on the operations of those facilities to directors of detention centers or director-generals of regional immigration bureaus (hereinafter referred to as "directors, etc.), and the directors, etc., promptly undertake reviews of the opinions submitted by each committee and take appropriate action on them, starting with those which can be dealt with immediately.

Committee members are selected from personnel who have an excellent personality and deep insight and who show enthusiasm for improving the operations of immigration detention centers, etc., and are appointed as part-time staff by the Minister of Justice. Specifically, ten or less members are appointed for each committee from intellectuals in diverse fields, including academic experts, legal experts, medical experts, NGO workers, staffs of international organizations, and representatives of local communities.
## Chapter 8 Appropriate Operation of Special Permission to stay in Japan

Under the Immigration Control Act, the Minister of Justice is authorized to grant special permission to stay to an offender against the law, and the Ministers' decision shall be made on case by case basis by comprehensively judging it from various factors, including the reason for stay, family conditions, behavior, current situation both at home and abroad, need for humanitarian considerations, and impact on other illegal foreign residents.

The Immigration Bureau is taking various measures, including formulation and announcement of the “Guidelines on Special Permission to Stay in Japan” and announcement of the “Cases where Special Permission to stay was granted and Cases where Special Permission to Stay in Japan was denied”, to enhance the transparency and predictability of special permission to stay.

## Section 1 ☐ Application of Special Permission Based on the "Guidelines on Special Permission to Stay in Japan"

Whether or not to grant special permission to stay shall be decided by the Minister of Justice based on comprehensive consideration of various factors with regard to each case, not limited to the subjective or personal circumstances of an offender against the law, and general criteria shall not be fit for such permission. However, in order to further enhance the transparency and fairness of the special permission to stay, the “Guidelines on Special Permission to Stay in Japan”, has been decided and announced.

These “Guidelines on Special Permission to Stay in Japan” provides more details concerning matters to be considered as positive factors or negative factors in judging whether to grant special permission to stay or not. They also present the concept for judgment. Therefore, judgment on whether to grant special permission to stay or not is to be made by comprehensively considering various circumstances based on the assessment of each of these factors and the need to take them into account.

Although only the Japanese Edition of the guidelines had been published until May 2010, the guidelines were translated in the multiple languages of English, Chinese, Korean, Portuguese, Spanish, and Tagalog. These information are also posted on the official websites.

## Section 2 ☐ Enhancement of the "Cases where Special Permission to Stay in Japan was Granted and Cases where Special Permission to Stay in Japan was Denied"

The Immigration Bureau has made public, examples of those who are granted special permission to stay and those who are not granted on the website of the Ministry of Justice since August 2004.
For the purpose of enhancing the transparency and fairness of the special permission to stay, the Immigration Bureau classified and organized such examples for better understanding and published them in a table. In addition, the bureau also published new examples in the same form in April, 2012.
## Chapter 9 Promotion of Appropriate and Prompt Refugee Protection

## Section 1 ☐ The Establishment and Publication of Targets for the Handling Period of Refugee Recognition Examinations

In July 2010, based on prolonged periods of refugee examination, the Immigration Bureau set six months as the standard period to process one refugee application and decided to process all applications within the period by the end of March 2011 in principle. In addition, the Immigration Bureau decided to announce the average processing (examination) period for refugee applications on a website of the Ministry of Justice on a quarterly basis.

The average period required for the processing (examination) before establishment of the objectives, between January and June 2010, was approximately 13 months, but in FY2011, the average for each quarter had remained within six months. It could be said that the Bureau’s goal was almost achieved.

The Immigration Bureau will continuously promote more proper and prompt refugee examination by collecting and organizing basic materials concerning information on the pending refugees' countries of origin and improving systems to improve expertise of staff members, and maintaining the standard period of six months.

## Section 2 ◆ Publication of Refugees' Countries of Origins

After the Japan Federation of Bar Associations (JFBA) proposed to enrich materials by establishing a data center concerning information on refugees' countries of origins so that applicants can browse and use them, the Immigration Bureau has posted information concerning refugees' countries of origins and international affairs since November 2010 on websites of the Ministry of Justice (In particular, reports of the United Kingdom Home Office and the United States Department of State are translated in Japanese and introduced on the websites.)

## Section 3 ◆ Efforts for Enhancing Abilities of Personnel Engaged in Duties for Refugee Recognition

For the purpose of fostering refugee inquirers with advanced knowledge and inquiring abilities, the Immigration Bureau has endeavored to improve training their staffs with the cooperation of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). In addition to conventional staff training for refugee inquirers that the bureau has long provided, practical three-day case study training by UNHCR was newly introduced in FY2010. In FY2011, one bureau official was sent to UNHCR Malaysia office for two weeks to participate UNHCR internship program.
# Section 4 ☐ Acceptance of Refugees through Resettlement to a Third Country

Resettlement to a third country is intended to transfer and resettle refugees who have evacuated from their countries of origins are temporarily taking shelter in a refugee camp in a neighboring country etc., to another country which agrees to accept such refugees from the countries where they were originally taken under protection. Resettlement to a third country is deemed to be one of the permanent solutions for refugee problems, as well as “voluntary repatriation” and “resettlement to the first countries of asylum”.

The UNHCR encourages each country to accept refugees based on resettlement to a third country from the standpoint of proper sharing of burdens in relation to refugee problems in the international community.

Up Until now, Japan has also taken measures to support resettlement of those recognized as Indochinese refugees and other refugees. To cope with various problems relating to refugees in the Asian region, the government reached a Cabinet Approvement on the introduction of the third country resettlement system (“Concerning the Implementation of Pilot Cases relating to the Acceptance of Refugees by Resettlement to a Third Country”) on December 16, 2008.

In accordance with the Cabinet Approvement and the “Detailed Measures for Implementing Pilot Cases relating to the Acceptance of Refugees by Resettlement to a Third Country” (Decision by the Liaison and Coordination council for Refugee issues on December 19, 2008), relevant ministries and agencies were to accept approximately 30 refugees from Myanmar, who were staying in the Maela Camp in Thailand, on an annual basis as a pilot case since FY2010 and support their resettlement in mutual cooperation. In the future, the pilot case will be reviewed from a variety of angles. Based on the review, such administrative authorities will further consider their future acceptance systems. In FY 2010, five families (27 people) came to Japan as the first group, and in FY2011, four families (18 people) followed.

At the Liaison and Coordination council for Refugee issues on March 29, 2011, decisions were made on the extension of the pilot cases for two more years, expansion of the camps (adding the Nupo Camp and the Umpiem Camp), enhancement of the support for resettlement, and the holding of the Advisory Council.

The Immigration Bureau mainly took charge of screening procedures for refugees to be accepted, and dispatched the officials to Thailand to conduct interview them in February 2012. The bureau will continue to make further efforts for smooth acceptance of refugees by resettlement to third countries in cooperation with related organizations.

## Section 5 ◆ Promotion of the Collaboration with NGOs

With regard to refugee-related administration, it is necessary to find out specific points to be improved through consultations with people who promote refugee protection from the standpoints of the private citizens and lawyers, and to work for the realization of better measures in collaboration and cooperation with citizens' groups.
## Part 2

In February 10, 2012, the Immigration Bureau concluded an agreement and exchanged a memorandum with the Forum for Refugees Japan, which is a network of NGOs and groups to support refugees, and JFBA on mutual cooperation, such as conducting consultation to find refugee-related administrative matters that the Immigration Bureau is responsible for and need improving, including procedures for recognizing refugee status, as well as exchanging information on the provision of housing, through assistance of refugee support groups, for refugees who are undergoing the process of recognition of refugee status.

Based on this memorandum, the Immigration Bureau will deliberate concrete means for collaboration and implement them.
# Chapter 10 Addressing the Global Community and Global Circumstances

## Section 1 ☐ Treaties and International Conventions

## 1 Negotiations on Treaties

## (1) Addressing “Basic Policy on Comprehensive Economic Partnerships”

Under the “Basic Policy on Comprehensive Economic Partnerships” decided by the Cabinet on November 9, 2010, the Government of Japan will consider measures to address the issues relating to the movement of natural persons from abroad, such as nurses and certified careworkers, on the basis of its efforts to promote the “employment and human resources strategies” described in its “New Growth Strategy”, and it will do so with careful attention to future domestic demographic trends, the possible effect of such movement on employment in Japan, requests from other countries, as well as securing Japan’s economic growth and social stabilization.

Based on the “Basic Policy on Comprehensive Economic Partnerships”, a group to study “the movement of natural persons” was established under the Minister of State for National Policy. The Immigration Bureau participated in the group from the aspect of immigration control. As a result of the study the Cabinet decided on the extension of period of stay for Indonesian and Filipino candidates for nurse and certified careworkers based on the Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) on March 11, 2011*. Furthermore, the group decided the “Basic Policy for the Acceptance of Candidates for Nurses and Certified Careworkers based on the Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA)” on June 20, 2011**.

## (2) Major Actions for Negotiations on Conclusion of EPAs with other Countries

An Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) aims to promote liberalization and facilitation of trade between signatory nations, as well as coordination of policies, relaxation of regulations, and cooperation in various economic areas, including tariffs, trade in services, investment, intellectual property, and personal exchanges. The Immigration Bureau has been actively involved in negotiations on conclusion of each EPA with various countries: Singapore (effective date: November 2002 (the effective date is stated similarly hereinafter)), Mexico (April 2005), Malaysia (July 2006), Chile (September 2007), Thailand (November 2007), Indonesia (July 2008), the Philippines (December 2008), Switzerland (September 2009), Viet Nam (October 2009), India (August 2011), and Peru