Silviase/jgov_v1.4_full_ann huggingface dataset:
Table 49: Changes in the number of organizations subject to a finding of misconduct by type of receiving arrangement

Organizations subject to a findingType of receiving arrangement	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009
Company-arranged scheme	5	11	9	7	2
Association-supervised scheme	Primary receiving organization	17	28	36	29	34
Secondary receiving organization	158	190	404	416	324
Total	180	229	449	452	360

Table 50: Number of findings of misconduct by category (2009)

(Cases)

Findings	Company-arranged sheme (2 organizations)	Association-supervised sheme	Total (360 organizations)
Category	Primary (34 organizations)	Secondary (324 organizations)
1st Category ①	Dual contract	0	0	0	0
②	Variance compared with training and technical internship plan	0	14	14	28
③	Name lending	0	9	87	96
④	In addition to the foregoing, preparation and use of fraudulent documents	0	19	2	21
2nd Category	Work in excess of stututory working hours	1	9	111	121
3rd Category	Malicious acts of infringement of human rights, etc.	0	3	28	31
4th Category	Failure to report serious cases, etc.	0	3	1	4
5th Category	Employment of illegal foreign workers	0	0	20	20
Violation against labor-related regulations	1	2	120	123
6th Category	Recurrence of similar acts	0	0	0	0
Total	2	59	383	444

(*) If one accepting organization is recognized as having committed “misconduct” of more than one category, it is listed for the respective categories, and as such, the number of accepting organizations is not identical to the number of recognized cases by category.
## Section 1 ♦ Proper and Smooth Implementation of Immigration and Residence Examination of Foreign College Students and Pre-college Students

Acceptance of foreign college students is meaningful in many aspects, such as strengthening of international goodwill, deepening of mutual understanding and friendship by creation of a human network, international contributions through human resource development, creation of an international campus environment in universities, and acceptance of human resources who will play a part in economic activities in Japan. The government formulated the “300,000 Foreign College Students Plan” to set a goal of increasing the acceptance of foreign students, and is working on government-wide measures toward realization of the goal.

For the purpose of realizing the plan, immigration control authorities continue efforts to ensure proper residence management in cooperation with educational institutions, and to promote proper and smooth acceptance of foreign college students. Specifically, with respect to applications made by educational institutions that do not give rise to overstayers or illegal workers by proper enrollment control, the documents to be submitted should be drastically simplified. On the other hand, with respect to applications made by educational institutions that give rise to large numbers of overstayers or illegal workers, strict examination needs to be carried out as in the past.

## Section 2 ☐ State of Implementation of Measures on Acceptance of College Students and Pre-college Students

The gist of the “300,000 Foreign College Students Plan” was formulated by relevant ministries and agencies in July 2008, and the Policy Discussion Meeting compiled the “Proposal on Acceptance of College Students and Pre-college Students” in January 2009. Based on the above plan and proposal, the following measures on acceptance of foreign students have been taken:

## 1 Proper and Smooth Implementation of Immigration and Residence Examination

To ensure proper and smooth implementation of immigration and residence examination, in the case of universities and other educational institutions which do not give rise to overstayers or illegal workers by proper enrollment control, the documents to be submitted should be drastically simplified. In principle, application forms shall be the only documents to be submitted.
## 2 Employment-related Support to Foreign Students Provided in the Procedures for Residence

(1) With regard to foreign students who graduate from a college and apply for permission to change their residence status for the purpose of getting a job at a company in Japan, especially those who intend to change their residence status to “engineer” or “specialist in humanities/international services”, the adequateness of their residence status shall be determined based on flexible judgment of a connection between their major subject in college and the company activities in which they will be involved.

(2) Since March 2008, the types of jobs that foreign students can get have been published on the website in order to improve clarity and transparency in the process of determining residence status.

(3) In order to ensure that foreign students can conduct a job search satisfactorily, in the case of those who have no problem residing in Japan and have received an endorsement regarding continuation of job-search activities from their universities, etc., the maximum period of job-search activities in which they can engage after graduation shall be extended from 180 days to one year. This measure has been taken since April 2009.

(4) It was decided to make reviews on the formats of documents, including the application form for permission to change the status of residence, and such reviews were contained in the revised Ordinance for Enforcement of the Immigration Control Act, which was enforced in July 2009. Since September 2009, foreign students who apply for permission to change their status of residence for the purpose of getting a job at a listed company, etc., in Japan shall be allowed to submit only an application form, in principle. This measure aims to simplify the documents to be submitted and shorten the examination period.

## 3 Extension of the Period of Stay

In order to ensure that foreign students can continuously and steadily devote themselves to study, it was decided to add two new categories of period of stay, “two years and three months” and “one year and three months”, with regard to the residence status of “College Student”. Such an addition was contained in the revised Ordinance for Enforcement of the Immigration Control Act, which was enforced in July 2009.

## 4 Integration of the Two Categories of Status of Residence, “College Student” and “Pre-college Student”

In recent years, the number of overstayers with the residence status of “Pre-college Student” has been on a downward trend, and the characterization of the residence status of “Pre-college Student” as a preparatory step to the residence status of “College Student” has become commonly accepted. In view of such circumstances, it was decided to integrate the two categories of status of residence to be granted to foreign nationals who receive education with “College Student”. Such an integration was contained in the revised Ordinance for Enforcement of the Immigration Control Act, which was enforced in July 2010.
## 5 Review of Permission to Engage in Activities other than those Permitted

Along with the integration of categories of residence status, it was decided to comprehensively permit foreign students to engage in activities outside the scope permitted up to hours a week, in principle.

The Ordinance for Enforcement of the Immigration Control Act was revised to stipulate that permission to engage in activities other than those permitted shall not be required for activities as a teaching assistant or research assistant in a university, etc., in receipt of remuneration. The revised ordinance was enforced in July 2010.

Table 51: Changes in the number and percentage of overstayers who entered Japan with the status of residence of “College Student” or “Pre-college Student”

Date Division	January 1 2005	January 1 2006	January 1 2007	January 1 2008	January 1 2009	January 1 2010
Total number of overstayers	207,299	193,745	170,839	149,785	113,072	91,778
College Student	8,173	7,628	7,448	6,667	5,090	3,610
Percentage of total (%)	3.9	3.9	4.4	4.5	4.5	3.9
Pre-college Student	8,506	7,307	5,281	4,311	3,186	2,232
Percentage of total (%)	4.1	3.8	3.1	2.9	2.8	2.4
# 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 Residents

Based on the “Five-Year Plan for Halving Illegal Residents” launched in 2004, each regional immigration bureau has actively promoted various measures, including strict implementation of landing/residence examination, aggressive 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 residents under the departure order system. As a result, the number of illegal 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 for the Realization of a Society Resistant to Crime” aiming to “create a society that generates no illegal residents, etc., under the new system of residence management”, the Immigration Bureau has continued efforts to further reduce the number of illegal residents, which decreased to about 110,000 as of January 1, 2010.

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

The Immigration Bureau thinks that the number of illegal residents in Japan has steadily decreased due to past efforts. However, it is estimated that there are still over 110,000 illegal residents in hiding, so the Bureau is making the following efforts to further reduce the number of illegal residents.

## (1) Strengthened Detection

Since FY 2004, the Immigration Bureau has established “detection officer units” that are supposed to engage full-time in detecting offenders against the Immigration Control Act in the Tokyo Regional Immigration Bureau, Nagoya Regional Immigration Bureau, Osaka Regional Immigration Bureau, and Yokohama District Immigration Office, which are located in large city areas with many offenders (6 units in the Tokyo Bureau, 2 units each in the Nagoya Bureau and the Osaka Bureau, and 1 unit in the Yokohama Office). In addition, the Immigration Bureau has enhanced the capacity of bureaus and offices $ ^{*} $ along with the construction of new office buildings to improve the ability to detect illegal residents, and is promoting joint detection by strengthening cooperation with the police.

However, it has become obvious that illegal 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. Therefore, the Bureau is working to promote efficient detection by making more effective use of information provided on illegal
$ ^{*} $ (Note) Capacity enhancement

○ Narita Airport District Immigration Office: 350 persons (August 2006)

Osaka Regional Immigration Bureau: 42 persons → 200 persons (October 2007)

○ Nagoya Regional Immigration Bureau: 120 persons → 400 persons (March 2008)

○ Yokohama District Immigration Office: 50 persons → 200 persons (June 2009)

## (2) Reinforced Collection and Analysis of Information on Illegal Residents

The Immigration Bureau receives a lot of information on illegal residents from the public. By checking information on illegal residents, including the above information and information obtained from related organizations (e.g., notification from the police, information about reports on employment of foreign workers from the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare), against various data maintained by the Immigration Bureau, the Bureau is trying to ensure that accurate analysis of information is carried out, aiming at facilitating efficient detection.

## (3) Encouragement of Voluntary Appearance at the Immigration Office

With the aim of encouraging illegal 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 for special permission to stay; (iii) public relations to encourage voluntary appearance at the immigration office.

The departure order system is a system under which overstayers satisfying certain requirements, such as those who appear at the immigration office voluntarily to return to their home country, are allowed to leave Japan in accordance with simplified procedures without being detained, as an exception to the preparatory detention policy. About 9,000 people were allowed to leave the country under this system in 2009 (see Item 5, Section 2, Chapter 2, Part I).

On the other hand, the guidelines for special permission to stay which were formulated 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 residents appear at the immigration office voluntarily, it is more likely that they will obtain special permission to stay.

The Immigration Bureau is also taking measures to publicize the system and the revised guidelines for special permission to stay by conducting active public relations activities regarding the departure order system, aiming to encourage illegal residents to voluntarily appear at the immigration office $ ^{*} $ .
# Section 2 ◆ Implementation of Measures against False Foreign Residents

## 1 False Foreign Residents, etc

False residents means “foreign nationals who falsify their status of residence and purpose of stay in the form of fake marriages, fake college students, fake employment, etc., and disguise themselves as legal foreign residents with a legal status that falls under any of the legitimate statuses of residence to work illegally in Japan”. Measures against them have become an important issue in immigration control administration, as well as measures against illegal residents. Although they practically appear to be “legal residents” and precise data on their actual number has not been obtained, there is concern over an increase of false residents who choose to false themselves as a means to enter and reside in Japan.

The existence of false residents abusing the residence status system cannot be overlooked, and may shake the foundation of immigration control administration in our country. Therefore, the Immigration Bureau is striving to strengthen measures against them.

## 2 Crackdown on False Residents, etc

## (1) Strengthened detection of Those Engaged in Activities other than those Permitted

When it is found that those who reside in Japan with a residence status that has a limit to activities, engage solely in work beyond the scope permitted under the status of residence granted at the time of entry, they are suspected to engage in activities other than those permitted and are subject to deportation. Therefore, detection of such offenders has been actively promoted.

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

In order to promote measures against false residents, it is important to carry out more effective detection based on collected and analyzed information.

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

## Section 3 ◆ Efforts toward Proper Treatment

## 1 Efforts toward more Proper Treatment of Detainees

In immigration detention centers, etc., proper treatment of trainees has been ensured with sufficient attention given to human rights by providing them as much freedom as possible within a scope which does not affect security. In July 2010, the “Immigration Detention Facilities Visiting Committee” consisting of outside experts
was established with the aim of increasing transparency in security treatment, and improving and enhancing operations of immigration detention centers, etc.

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

There are 22 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, international organ workers, and representatives of local communities.
# Proper Operation of the Special Permission to stay

Under the Immigration Control Act, the Minister of Justice is authorized to grant special permission to stay to an offender against the law, and his decision shall be made individually with respect to each case 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 residents.

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

## Section 1 ◆ Formulation and Announcement of the “Guidelines Relating to Special Permission to stay”

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, 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 for Special Permission to Stay”, summarizing what is to be considered in judging whether special permission to stay should be granted or not, was announced in October 2006.

After that, the circumstances surrounding illegal residents changed because more than two years and a half had passed since the formulation of the guidelines, and social conditions changed both at home and abroad. Then, the ideal system for special permission to stay was discussed in Diet deliberations on the revisions of the Immigration Control Act. In view of such situation, the said guidelines were revised in July 2009.

This revision aims to give more details about matters to be considered in judging whether to grant special permission to stay or not. It also aims to present the concept for judgment, and to provide examples for each case to be considered in either of the directions toward “granting special permission to stay” or “ordering deportation”.

## Section 2 ☑ Announcement of the “Cases where Special Permission to Stay was Granted and Cases where Special Permission to Stay 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.

These examples to be made public were reviewed one by one, and in April 2010, in order to plainly and clearly show examples, they were classified and sorted by category and arranged in a new table.
# Promotion of Appropriate and Prompt Refugee protection

## Section 1 ◆ Efforts to Ensure Appropriate and Prompt Procedures for Recognition of Refugee Status

As a result of a drastic review on the Refugee Recognition System according to revisions made to the Immigration Control Act in 2005, the number of applicants for recognition of refugee status has increased rapidly in recent years. In 2008, it reached 1,599, a record high, almost double that of the previous year. In 2009, it remained at a high level, standing at 1,388.

Under such circumstances, in order to ensure appropriate and prompt examination, the Immigration Bureau is trying to improve and consolidate the clerical work processing system for refugee recognition by upskilling the staff through training programs and increasing the number of staff engaged in refugee-related work. The Bureau is also trying to speed up processing of applications by strengthening cooperation with UNHCR, etc., and maintaining basic data on refugees' countries of origin and the international situation.

With regard to those who do not satisfy the requirements for recognition of refugee status as stipulated in the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees but who cannot return to their home country due to the situation of their country or have a special reason for being allowed to stay in Japan, their circumstances shall be taken into account individually, and if they should be treated based on humanitarian considerations, special permission to stay in the country shall be granted. The Bureau will continue to respond to applicants for recognition of refugee status, giving full attention to their circumstances, etc.

## Section 2 ☐ Acceptance of Refugees through Resettlement to a Third Country

Resettlement to a third country aims to transfer and resettle refugees who have evacuated from their home countries and are temporarily taking shelter in a refugee camp in a neighboring country, to another country (third country) which agrees to accept such refugees. Resettlement to a third country is deemed to be one of the permanent solutions for refugee problems, as well as “voluntary repatriation” and “resettlement of 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.

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 understanding 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 content of the said Cabinet understanding 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 Conference for Countermeasures for Refugees on December 19, 2008), a project for acceptance and resettlement support of Myanmar refugees who are staying in the Maela Camp in Thailand was launched as a pilot case in FY 2010. Based on the results of the pilot case, verification from various angles will be carried out in cooperation with concerned administrative agencies to further discuss the future direction of acceptance.

The Immigration Bureau mainly took charge of screening procedures for refugees to be accepted, and conducted an on-site interview survey at the camp by refugee inquirers in February 2010. The Bureau will continue to be actively engaged in these duties in cooperation with relevant administrative agencies.