Silviase/jgov_v1.4_full_ann huggingface dataset:
Japan’s jurisdiction.

## (3) Inquiry Content

All inquiries need to be submitted in writing in Japanese (including electronic means) and needs to meet the following requirements:

(i) A description of the individual, specific facts relating to actions the enterprise seeks to take in the future;

(ii) Specific indication of the provisions of laws and regulations among those made public, per section 1.(2) above, on the FSA website, or government orders based on those laws and regulations, with respect to which the inquirer wishes to determine applicability to its prospective action;

(iii) A statement from the inquirer agreeing to the contents of its inquiry and the response thereto being made public; and

(iv) The inquirer’s clearly stated opinion concerning the applicability of the provisions of laws and regulations specified in 2.(3)(ii) above, and the basis for this opinion.

## (4) Submission of Additions and Corrections to Inquiries

The FSA may, if necessary, request that the inquirer submit additional or corrected documents in cases in which the content of a written inquiry is insufficient, or it is necessary to confirm the identity of the inquirer. The inquirer will only be asked for additional paper work that is demand essential to meet the requirements for the FSA.

### 3. Responses

## (1) Response Timeframe

In principle, the Director of the section that has jurisdiction over the regulation in question will issue a response to an inquiry within 30 days of the arrival of a written inquiry at the contact point. However, in the following exceptional cases, the timeframe will be extended. The FSA is required to ensure that the response time, including the period for submitting additional or corrected documents, is as short as possible.

(i) In cases in which the inquiry involves advanced finance techniques or technology, and for which a response requires careful judgment, the FSA will issue a response within 60 days (in principle) of the initial receipt of the inquiry.

(ii) In cases in which the quantity of inquiries exceeds the specific section’s capacity to issue timely responses, a response will be issued within a reasonable time period exceeding 30 days.

(iii) In cases in which the regulations/laws in question are jointly administered by the FSA and another government agency, a response will be issued within 60 days (in
principle) of the initial receipt of the inquiry.

In cases of above 2.(4), in which corrected or additional information was requested of the inquirer, the days involved in gathering this additional information will not be counted in the 30 day time period.

If the FSA cannot issue a response to an inquiry within 30 days, the FSA will notify the inquirer of the reason for the delay and the expected time of response.

## (2) Respondent

The FSA response will be issued by the Director of the section that has jurisdiction over the law or regulation in question.

## (3) Method of Response

Responses to an inquiry will be made in writing in Japanese. However, the foregoing should not apply in cases where the inquirer agrees to receive a verbal response.

In Responses, both the opinion on whether or not the laws and regulations mentioned in the inquiry are applicable, and the basis for that opinion, are clearly stated, and the following cautions are attached.

## (Caution): A written response

- should contain a clear statement to the effect that the response in question;

- is made from the position of having jurisdiction to enforce the laws and regulations (provisions) subject to the inquiry;

- is premised only on the facts as presented by the inquirer;

- is made only with respect to the relationship of the prospective business activities to the laws and regulations (provisions) subject to the inquiry;

- indicates the FSA’s opinion as of that present time;

- may be different in cases in which: the facts differ from what was presented in the inquiry; related facts exist that were not presented in the inquiry; the related laws and regulations are changed; etc.; and

- cannot bind the determination of any investigative agency or the finding of any court, including the application of penal provisions.

## (4) Cases of No Response

In the following cases, the Director of the relevant FSA section receiving an inquiry may elect not to respond to the inquiry. In the event no response is made to an inquiry for any of the reasons, the Director of the relevant FSA section notifies the
inquirer without delay that no response is made to the inquiry, and indicates the reason for the decision not to respond:

(i) The inquiry contains insufficient or unclear factual information upon which to base a decision;

(ii) The inquiry concerns independent private sector rules or arrangements;

(iii) The inquiry involves cases on which the FSA has already publicly and clearly stated its opinion by announcement or detailed regulations;

(iv) The inquiry is substantively the same as a previous inquiry to which the FSA has already posted a public response on its website;

(v) The inquiry regards circumstances for which the inquirer is currently under legal investigation, etc., or in which a law actually is being enforced; and

(vi) The inquiry relates to a similar matter which is being contested legally (a lawsuit; a statement of complaint under the Administrative Complaint Investigation Law; or a statement of complaint under another law).

## (5) Withdrawal of an Inquiry

The Director of the relevant FSA section will not respond to an inquiry, if, prior to the issuance of a response, the inquirer requests that the inquiry be withdrawn. When the inquirer requests that the inquiry be withdrawn, the guidelines below regarding publication are not applicable.

### 4. Method of Publication of Inquiries and Responses

As a general rule, the contents of its inquiry and the response thereto should be posted on the FSA website within 30 days of the issuance of the response.

However, in cases in which the inquirer, in a supplementary note, requests a delay in publication of the inquiry and response within a certain period of time, offers reasonable grounds for such a delay, and specifies a time when publication will be possible, upon confirmation of the reason for the requested delay, the FSA may delay the publication of the inquiry and response. In such cases, the delay in publication may not necessarily last as long as the inquirer requests. The publication may be delayed only as long as the rationale provided by the inquirer for the delay continues to apply.

The FSA may make the inquiry and response public provided it has given prior notification to the inquirer. In a case where an inquiry or the response thereto contains information that falls under the category of an event of non-disclosure as prescribed in the Law Concerning the Disclosure of Information Retained by Administrative Agencies (Law No. 42, promulgated May 14, 1999) the FSA may, as necessary, withhold such information from disclosure.
Above section 4. revised and enforced July 4, 2003.

Above section 3.(3),(5) revised and enforced May 14, 2004.

Above sections 2.(3), and 3(1),(3),(4) revised and enforced October 7, 2005.

Above sections 1.(1), 2.(1),(2),(3),(4), 3.(1) and 4 revised and enforced July 2, 2007.
### iii. Written Inquiry Process for financial industry participants (regarding General Interpretations of Laws and Regulations)

## - Scope of Inquirers

Inquirers need to be business operators/business groups to which the laws and regulations under the FSA’s jurisdiction are directly applicable.

Subject of Inquiries

An inquiry is to satisfy all of the following requirements in order to be subject to the said process:

(i) Asking about the general interpretation of the law or regulation, not asking whether a law or regulation is applicable to a specific transaction. (Not eligible for the application of the Prior Confirmation Procedures on the Application of Laws and Regulations (“No Action Letter” System)).;

(ii) Not seeking factual recognition;

(iii) Asking about transactions and other matters which are common to business operators to which the laws and regulations under the FSA’s jurisdiction are directly applicable and which a number of business operators are expected to inquire into; and

(iv) Not asking about points that are clear in light of the Guideline for Administrative Processes and other publicly-available materials.

## - Method of Inquiry

The specific inquiry method through the said process is as follows:

(i) Inquiries should be made in writing in Japanese (including electronic means) to the Director of the relevant FSA division with jurisdiction over the law or regulation in question.

(ii) The written inquiry form is expected to clearly indicate that the following items are specified therein. In addition to the written inquiry, the inquirer may be asked to submit additional or corrected documents, if necessary, in order to clarify the contents of the inquiry and judge whether it meets the criteria specified in “Subject of Inquiries” above.

a. The legal provision which the inquiry concerns and specific points of issue;

b. The inquirer’s opinion concerning the inquired points of issue and the basis thereof; and

c. A statement from the inquirer agreeing to have the contents of the inquiry and the response thereto made public.
## - Method of Response

The Director of the relevant FSA division will endeavor to reply to the inquirer within two months in principle of the arrival of a written inquiry. In cases where it is not possible to reply within two months, the Director will provide the reason for the delay and the expected date of reply to the inquirer.

## - Method of Publication

After a response is provided to the inquirer, the inquiry and the response will be immediately posted on the FSA website. (The names of the inquirer and the Director of the relevant division will not be disclosed.)

## - Number of Responses to Date

The total number of responses to date since the introduction of the system is four (one inquiry in the program year 2013).

## - Other Points of Attention upon Use

### a. Relationship to the “No Action Letter” System

Inquiries regarding specific cases to which the “No Action Letter” System (Prior Confirmation Procedures on the Application of Laws and Regulations by Administrative Agencies) is applicable are not subject to this process.

### b. Scope of the Responses

Responses will express general interpretations of the law and regulation in question at the time of inquiry, and do not provide judgment regarding the application of the law or regulation to a specific case. Furthermore, they do not have binding power on the judgment of the investigative and/or judicial authorities.
### APPENDIX II. Enforcement Measures

### i. Financial Administrative Actions

- Basic Concepts of Administrative Actions

The FSA takes strict and appropriate administrative actions $ ^{15} $ under clear rules if it objectively confirms that a serious problem has arisen in user protection or in ensuring fairness in the market through on-site inspections, collection of reports and other supervisory methods.

In March 2007, the FSA published “Administrative Actions in the Financial Sector” to make clear the basic principle of administrative actions. In April 2008, the FSA made a revision reflecting the spirit of “Principles in the Financial Services Industry (hereinafter, “Principles”).” This revision made it clear that alleviation of administrative actions might be made in a case where each financial institution makes voluntary responses accurately, reflecting the spirit of the Principles.

Box: Statistics of administrative actions in the program year 2013 (by business category)

The number of implementations of administrative actions by business category $ ^{16} $ in the program year 2013 is as follows $ ^{17} $ :

1. Banks 5 [1]

2. Cooperative structured financial institutions 1 [0]

3. Financial instruments business operators 43 [19]

4. Insurance companies 0 [0]

5. Money lenders ___ 0 [0]

6. Specific Purpose Companies 0 [0]

7. Issuers of prepaid payment instruments 0 [0]

8. Fund transfer business operators 0 [0]
### ii. Administrative Monetary Penalty

A monetary penalty system was introduced to prevent illegal acts undermining the confidence in the securities markets in April 2005. The system imposes monetary penalties as an administrative action on persons who engage in an illegal act under the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act.

Furthermore, a monetary penalty system against certified public accountants and audit firms for attestation of false statements stipulated in the Certified Public Accountants Act was introduced in April 2008.

Box: Acts of violation that are subject to the monetary penalty system
- Financial Instruments and Exchange Act
(i) Market misconduct
Insider trading, market manipulation (e.g., wash trading, and illegal stabilizing of stock transactions), spreading rumors or use of fraudulent means
(ii) No submission of or false statements in securities registration statements, etc., for public offering and secondary distribution
(iii) No submission of or false statements in annual securities reports, etc., which should be submitted each program year
(iv) No implementation of advertisement for commencement of TOB, or false statements in tender offer notifications, etc.
(v) No submission of or false statements in large-shareholding reports, etc.
(vi) No submission of or false statements in “specified securities information,” or provision of false information concerning issuers in markets intended for professional investors
(vii) Acts that facilitate the submission of false disclosure statements, etc.
(viii) Acts of communicating non-public information and soliciting to trade (amended in June 2013, enforced in April 2014)
- Certified Public Accountants Act
(i) When an employee of an audit firm (or a certified public accountant) attests to, with intent, financial documents containing false information, errors or omissions as those containing no false information, errors or omissions.
(ii) When an employee of an audit firm (or a certified public accountant) attests to, without due care, financial documents containing material false information, errors or omissions as those containing no material false information, errors or omissions.

On April 1, 2005, the FSA launched the appointment of administrative law judges.
The FSA, at the same time, established the Trial Procedures Office to operate the administrative monetary penalty system.

- Process for the Issuance of Administrative Monetary Penalty Payment Order

a. Financial Instruments and Exchange Act

(i) If the Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission (SESC) deems that there has been an act of violation of the law or regulations subject to an administrative monetary penalty, the SESC makes a recommendation to the FSA Commissioner for the issuance of an administrative monetary penalty payment order.

(ii) Following the recommendation, the FSA Commissioner decides on the commencement of trial procedures.

(iii) Administrative law judges prepare a draft decision concerning the order of payment of an administrative monetary penalty following the completion of the trial procedures, and submit it to the FSA Commissioner.

(iv) The FSA Commissioner decides and issues the Order of Payment of Administrative Monetary Penalty in accordance with the draft decision.

### b. Certified Public Accountants Act

(i) If the FSA Commissioner deems that there has been attestation of false documents that is subject to an administrative monetary penalty, the Commissioner decides on the commencement of trial procedures.

(ii) Administrative law judges prepare a draft decision concerning the order of payment of an administrative monetary penalty following the completion of the trial procedures, and submit it to the FSA Commissioner.

(iii) The FSA Commissioner decides and issues the Order of Payment of Administrative Monetary Penalty in accordance with the draft decision.

- The Number of Order of Payment of Administrative Monetary Penalty Issued

In the program year 2013, the FSA Commissioner issued order of payment of administrative monetary penalty against 40 cases of market misconduct and eight cases of false disclosure.
Order of Payment of Administrative Monetary Penalty Issued to Date

- Cases violating the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act

Program Year	Market Misconduct	False Disclosure, etc.	Total
Prior to program year 2006	18	4	22
program year 2007	21	10	31
program year 2008	15	11	26
program year 2009	42	9	51
program year 2010	20	23	43
program year 2011	25	14	39
program year 2012	29	9	38
program year 2013	40	8	48

- Cases violating the Certified Public Accountants Act

There has been no issuance of an order of payment of administrative monetary penalty since the introduction of the administrative penalty system in April 2008.

Record of Trial Procedure Dates $ ^{18} $

- Market manipulation concerning shares of Mimaki Engineering Co., Ltd.

(Case No. 38; 2012)

February 5, 2013 Decision on Commencement of Trial Procedures

September 12, 2013 Trial

December 10, 2013 Administrative Monetary Penalty Payment Order

- Market manipulation concerning shares of Fullcast Technology Co., Ltd.

(Case No. 12; 2013)

June 27, 2013 Decision on Commencement of Trial Procedures

November 20, 2013 Trial

January 23, 2014 Administrative Monetary Penalty Payment Order

- Insider trading concerning shares of OST Japan Group Inc. by a person receiving information from a party under negotiation to conclude a contract with a tender offeror

(Case No. 23; 2013)

October 29, 2013 Decision on Commencement of Trial Procedures
January 10, 2014 Trial

February 28, 2014 Administrative Monetary Penalty Payment Order

- Insider trading by a person receiving information from another person under negotiation to conclude a contract with OKWave

(Case No. 16; 2013)

August 30, 2013 Decision on Commencement of Trial Procedures

February 13, 2014 Trial

April 18, 2014 Administrative Monetary Penalty Payment Order

- False statement in annual securities reports of Japan Wind Development Co., Ltd.

(Case No. 41; 2012)

March 29, 2013 Decision on Commencement of Trial Procedures

March 26, 2014 First trial

April 22, 2014 Second trial

August 28, 2014 Administrative Monetary Penalty Payment Order
## [Joint efforts in the public and private sectors toward maintaining and improving the safety of transportation]

☐ Efforts expected of businesses toward the establishment of safety climate

In an opinion poll conducted in December 2005, when asked what measures they thought needed to be taken to improve the safety of public transportation, although many respondents mentioned enrichment and enhancement of provisions by the government, many also mentioned development of corporate structures by businesses.

## Measures Perceived to be Necessary for the Improvement of Public Transportation Safety (multiple responses allowed)

Source: MLIT

In order for businesses to reaffirm the significance of ensuring safety and make efforts toward creating a safety climate in a unified fashion from top management down to the field of direct contact with users, it is strongly expected that the efforts listed below, beginning with the creation of a safety management posture, will be tirelessly carried out under the leadership of top management.

○ Creation of a safety management posture and ongoing efforts

• Clarification of the commitment of top management

• Establishment and clarification of basic policy

• Exposure of safety risks in business operation (risk assessment)

• Prioritization of discovered safety risks and examination and execution of countermeasures

• Development of internal corporate structure and clarification of responsibility and authority

• Establishment of suitable processes for communication and information sharing

• Implementation of effective internal auditing (including the use of external personnel)

• Implementation of regular review and ongoing improvement measures with participation by top management

○ Implementation of education and training to create a safety climate

○ Establishment of response strategies for the outbreak of crises

○ Enforcement of proper health management (physical aptitude, driver aptitude, daily management)

## ○ Government reinforcement of oversight systems for businesses and environmental improvement

A switchover of administrative methods from the conventional field-based and spot check-based methods must be effected in order to solidify the efforts of businesses to ensure safety. While employers' internal safety management efforts are based on the principle of business autonomy and self-responsibility, in addition to the conventionally enforced security (safety) audit, supplemental government assessment must also be carried out on matters like whether the top management is committed to the efforts and whether the efforts are functioning as a process. Other administrative methods like those listed below must also be examined and executed.
• Implementation of a process check (safety management assessment) in transportation companies to assess the suitability of internal management systems, including safety management

• Enrichment and reinforcement of specialized and systematic security (safety) auditing

• Introduction of effective incentives and the like to accommodate the unique characteristics of each mode of transport

• Reinforcement of organization control, including enrichment and enhancement of safety observers and the setting up of safety monitoring organizations that operate across modes of transport

• Utilization of third party checking functions from outside organizations

In addition to strengthening the business oversight system, improving the environment so that businesses can make efforts toward accident prevention is another important role the government must play. In terms of actual content, it is necessary to review and implement items like those listed below.

• Creation of guidelines for safety management

• Support for development of human resources and education and training in businesses

• Execution of safety data collection and analysis, review of safety standards based on the results, and other preventive safety measures

• Thorough investigation into the causes of accidents, including the enrichment and reinforcement of the organization and structure of the Aircraft and Railway Accidents Investigation Committee, as well as appropriate and timely disclosure of information

○ Strengthening and quickening of measures for railroad crossings

Based on recent incidents resulting in deaths and injuries at “un-opening railroad crossings,” in order to prevent accidents and improve traffic flow at railroad crossings it is important to make efforts to accelerate measures for railroad crossings, including measures for “un-opening railroad crossings” with a two-pronged approach using “drastic measures” like continuous grade-separated crossing initiatives and “fast measures” like widening the pedestrian walkways at railroad crossings, constructing pedestrian crossing bridges and the like, and implementing sophisticated railroad crossings regulators (“smart railroad crossings”) that reduce the time that the crossing bars are down.

Image Representation of "Smart Railroad Crossings" that Reduce the Time that the Crossing Bars are Down

Source: MLIT
図-8-イ 雇用と生産の変動（皮革：日本）

図－8－ロ 雇用と生産の変動（LEATHER AND LEATHER PRODUCTS：アメリカ）
図-9-イ 雇用と生産の変動（窯業土石：日本）

図-9-1 雇用と生産の変動（STONE CLAY AND GLASS PRODUCTS：アメリカ）
図-10-イ 雇用と生産の変動（鉄鋼：日本）

図-10-1 雇用と生産の変動（PRIMARY METAL INDUSTRIES：アメリカ）
図-11-イ 雇用と生産の変動（非鉄金属：日本）

図-11-1 雇用と生産の変動（PRIMARY METAL INDUSTRIES：アメリカ）
図-12-イ 雇用と生産の変動（金属製品：日本）

図-12-1 雇用と生産の変動（FABRICATED METAL PRODUCTS：アメリカ）
図-13-イ 雇用と生産の変動（一般機械：日本）

図-13-1 雇用と生産の変動（MACHINERY EXCEPT ELECTRICAL：アメリカ）