Silviase/jgov_v1.4_full_ann huggingface dataset:
Reference 60 Changes in the number of foreign nationals handed over under a departure order by nationality/region

(People)

YearNationality/Region	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016
Total	2,587	2,479	2,587	3,571	4,094
China	1,244	1,261	1,283	1,660	1,695
Thailand	109	135	310	641	765
Viet Nam	93	120	196	387	629
Philippines	338	241	225	299	322
Indonesia	90	102	81	187	257
R.O.Korea	343	293	214	169	154
Mongolia	50	46	60	50	70
Nepal	22	23	15	13	23
Peru	39	27	11	14	20
Brazil	23	13	9	8	17
Others	236	218	183	143	142

$ ^{*} $ “China” does not include Taiwan, China (Hong Kong) or China (others).

## (2) Examination

### A. Receipt and Processing of Cases

The number of cases of departure orders in 2016 was 4,094, accounting for 28.8% of the total number of cases of examination of the violation. This represented an increase of 523 (14.6%) when compared to 2015.

As those subject to a departure order voluntarily appear at a regional immigration bureau, wishing to depart from Japan they are promptly processed after their cases are sent by immigration control officers.

### B. Issuance of a Written Departure Order

The number of cases in which were issued with a written departure order having been determined to be eligible for a departure order, was 4,101 in 2016.

According to the statistics by nationality/region, the largest number was from China at 1,701, accounting for 41.5% of the total, followed by Thailand at 766 (18.7%), Viet Nam at 627 (15.3%), the Philippines at 326 (7.9%), and Indonesia at 256 (6.2%), and the top five countries accounted for 89.6% of the total (Reference 61).
Reference 61 Changes in the number of issuance of written departure orders by nationality/region

(Cases)

YearNationality/Region	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016
Total	2,594	2,478	2,592	3,573	4,101
China	1,252	1,259	1,282	1,662	1,701
Thailand	109	135	310	641	766
Viet Nam	92	118	203	387	627
Philippines	336	241	224	298	326
Indonesia	90	102	81	188	256
R.O.Korea/Korea	348	294	214	169	154
Mongolia	50	46	59	51	69
Nepal	22	23	15	13	23
Peru	37	27	11	16	20
Brazil	22	13	9	9	17
Others	236	220	184	139	142

$ ^{*} $ “China” does not include Taiwan, China (Hong Kong) or China (others).

## (3) Confirmation of Departure

Foreign nationals who are deemed to be subject to a departure order are required, as with foreign nationals departing within the period of stay, to receive a seal of verification of departure as well as the written departure order that was issued to them.
# Chapter 6 Recognition of Refugee Status

Due to the recognition that it is important for Japan to fulfill its obligations in the international community by accepting refugees, Japan became a signatory to the Refugee Convention in 1981 and the Protocol in 1982 (hereinafter, “the Refugee Convention” and “the Protocol” are referred to together as “the Refugee Convention, etc.”) and as a result, also established a system for recognition of refugee status.

Thereafter, from the perspective of ensuring proper and prompt protection of refugees through fairer procedures, the refugee recognition system has undergone some revisions. The Act to Amend the Immigration Control Act was enforced on May 16, 2005, which included the establishment of a system to permit provisional stay and the refugee examination counselors system.

The Immigration Bureau has further improved and strengthened its organizational structure and investigation system, and has endeavored to ensure proper implementation of the refugee recognition system to handle applications for refugee status quickly and appropriately.

## Section 1 Applications and Processing for Recognition of Refugee Status

### 1. Application for Refugee Status

In 2016, the total number of applicants who applied for recognition of refugee status in Japan was 10,901, which was an increase of 3,315 (43.7%) when compared to 2015, continuing on from the previous year to mark a record high (Reference 62).

Reference 62 Changes in the number of applications for refugee recognition

Year	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016
Applications	2,545	3,260	5,000	7,586	10,901

The number of nationalities/regions of the applicants was 79, and the major nationalities/regions from which applicants came were in descending order: Indonesia at 1,829 (16.8%), Nepal at 1,451 (13.3%), the Philippines at 1,412 (13.0%), Turkey at 1,143 (10.5%), Viet Nam at 1,072 (9.8%), Sri Lanka at 938 (8.6%), Myanmar at 650 (6.0%), India at 470 (4.3%), Cambodia at 318 (2.9%), Pakistan at 289 (2.7%), Bangladesh at 242 (2.2%), Ghana at 174 (1.6%), China at 156 (1.4%), Nigeria at 108 (1.0%), Iran at 107 (1.0%) and Cameroon at 66 (0.6%).

The applicants at the time of their applications were composed of 9,702 (89.0%) legal residents and 1,199 (11.0%) illegal residents. Of the illegal residents, the number of those who applied after a detention order or deportation order had been issued was 782, accounting for
65.2% of the total.

Of the total number of applicants, 1,497 applicants accounting for 13.7% had applied for recognition of refugee status in the past. These applicants comprised 1,009 legal residents (75.4% of whom held the status of residence of “Designated Activities”, which had been granted by reason that their applications were undergoing examination.) and 488 illegal residents (82.2% of whom had already been issued with a deportation order.).

### 2. Processing of Applications for Refugee Status

The total number of applicants whose application for recognition of refugee status was processed in 2016 was 8,193, an increase of 4,295 (110.2%) from 2015. The number of applicants who were recognized as refugees was $ 26^{(*)} $ while the number of applicants who were denied recognition of refugee status was 7,492. The number of applicants who withdrew their applications and others was 675.

Further, the immigration administration is allowed to make exceptional arrangements within its authority for applicants who have special extenuating circumstances, even if they have not been recognized as refugees who fall under the definition of refugees specified in the Refugee Convention, etc. For example, if an applicant, who is denied recognition of refugee status, is unable to return to his or her home country due to situational problems in his or her country or has some other special reason necessitating that he or she stay in Japan, special arrangements may be made flexibly on a case-by-case basis, taking the situation of the foreign national into consideration within the Japanese immigration control framework. In 2016, 97 applicants were allowed to stay in Japan (Reference 63).

Reference 63 Changes in the number of foreign nationals protected as refugees, etc.

(People)

Year	1978~2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016
Division
Refugees status	Recognized as a refugee	598	18	6	11	27	28
Refugees for resettlement	11,364	0	18	23	19	18
Others	1,994	112	151	110	79	97
Total	13,956	130	175	144	125	143

$ ^{*1} $ The number of persons recognized as refugees includes those who were denied recognition as a refugee in the primary examination, but were recognized as a result of the filing of an objection.
### 3. Implementation of the System for Permission for Provisional Stay

The number of foreign nationals who were granted permission for provisional stay was 58 in 2016, a decline of 25 (30.1%) from 2015.

The number of those who underwent an examination as to whether or not they should be granted permission for provisional stay was 930\. The major reasons for decisions not granting permission were as follows $ ^{*} $ :

(i) Applicants had applied for recognition of refugee status after the deadline of six months from the date of landing in Japan (in the case of those for whom the grounds for being a refugee had arisen during their stay in Japan, the date such fact became known to them): 487 persons.

(ii) There had been Reasonable grounds to believe that the foreign national will flee: 345 persons.

(iii) Applicants had already received a deportation order: 317 persons.
## Section 2 Appeal $ ^{(*)} $

### 1. Appeal

The total number of appeals filed by applicants who were denied recognition of refugee status (hereinafter referred to as “denial of recognition of refugee status”) in 2016 was 5,197, an increase of 2,077 (66.6%) from 2015 (Reference 64).

Reference 64 Changes in the number of appeals, and decisions of the Minister of Justice

(People)

Year Division	1982 ~ 2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016	Total
Not recognized as a refugee	2,773	389	446	791	1,703	1,336	2,002	2,083	2,499	2,906	3,411	7,492	27,831
Appeal	1,862	340	362	429	1,156	859	1,719	1,738	2,408	2,533	3,120	5,197	21,723
Decision / Determination, etc.	With reason	32	12	4	17	8	13	14	13	3	5	8	2	131
Without reason	1,425	127	183	300	230	325	635	790	921	1,171	1,763	2,112	9,982
Withdrawn, etc.	295	33	34	34	70	113	231	193	211	344	504	822	2,884

### 2. Processing of the Appeal

Of the appeals filed by applicants who failed to obtain recognition of refugee status, 2,936 of them were handled in 2016, an increase of 661 (29.1%) from 2015. According to the statistics, 2 appeals were found to be with reasonable grounds (8 in the previous year), 2,112 appeals were found to be without any reasonable grounds (1,763 in the previous year) and 822 appeals were including appeals withdrawn by the foreign nationals (504 in the previous year) (Reference $ ^{[64]} $ ).

The total number of times refugee examination counselors who were present at an oral statement of opinions by the petitioner, etc. and a hearing in 2016 was 996, and the number of cases in which written opinions were submitted by refugee examination counselors was 1,752 in the same year.
## Section 3 Landing Permission for Temporary Refuge

With respect to landing permission for temporary refuge, 451 applications were submitted, and 13 applications were granted permission over the past five years (from 2012 to 2016).
# Measures Against Trafficking in Persons and Protection of Foreign Victims of Domestic Violence

## Section 1 Measures Against Trafficking in Persons

### 1. Measures Against Trafficking in Persons

Trafficking in persons is a grave violation of human rights and a prompt and accurate response is called for from a humanitarian perspective. This is due to the fact that trafficking in persons inflicts serious mental and physical pain on the victims, especially on women and children, and it is difficult to recover from such damage. Moreover, human trafficking is an issue of serious concern to the international community since it is a crime which is committed across borders.

The Japanese government formulated the “Action Plan for Measures against Trafficking in Persons” through the relevant ministries and agencies in December 2004 and the “Action Plan for Measures against Trafficking in Persons 2009” through the Ministerial Conference for Measures against Crime in December 2009, and the entire government has been promoting measures up to this point. The “Action Plan for Measures against Trafficking in Persons 2014” was formulated through the same Conference in December 2014 in order to work on more powerful, comprehensive and all-encompassing measures against human trafficking. In May 2017, the “Conference for the Promotion of Measures against Trafficking in Persons” comprising the competent ministers in charge of measures against human trafficking held its third meeting, and the relevant government ministries and agencies led by the Conference are currently promoting government-wide efforts against the trafficking of persons.

In addition, based on the “Action Plan for Measures against Trafficking in Persons 2014”, the Immigration Bureau has also been striving to prevent human trafficking by further strengthening its system of cooperation with the related organizations, has been tracking hidden cases where there is the possibility of human trafficking and has been proactively engaged in eradicating trafficking in persons and offering appropriate protection to the victims.

### 2. Protection of Victims of Trafficking in Persons

The Immigration Bureau gives full consideration to the position of the victims of trafficking, and grants permission such as extension of the period of stay or a change of the status of residence from the perspective of victim protection, and moreover, if the victim is in violation of the Immigration Control Act such as by staying beyond the authorized period of stay, the legal status of the victim will be stabilized through such means as granting special permission to stay to the victim.

The number of foreign nationals for whom the Immigration Bureau implemented procedures for protection as victims of trafficking in persons (including support to return to their home country) was 21 in 2016 (26 persons in the previous year). According to the statistics by
nationality/region, 9 victims came from Thailand (8 in the previous year), 7 victims came from Cambodia (0 in the previous year) and 5 victims came from the Philippines (17 in the previous year).

The number of victims who had a status of residence out of the total of 21 victims was 11 persons (15 persons in the previous year), and the number of victims who were in violation of the Immigration Control Act such as illegally staying beyond the authorized period of stay was 10 persons (11 persons in the previous year). In addition, all of the victims who were in violation of the Immigration Control Act were granted special permission to stay in Japan (Reference 65).

The number of victims has declined significantly since 2005, when the Immigration Bureau first started collecting statistics and offered protection to 115 victims, and the number has been fluctuating at around 20 victims in recent years. This is thought to be because the entire government has been working together on measures under the Action Plan for Measures against Trafficking in Persons, and owing to the fact that measures to prevent and eradicate trafficking in persons, such as the revision of the ordinance on landing criteria pertaining to the status of residence of “Entertainer” made in the same year and following years and the implementation of strict landing examinations have had a certain level of effect (Reference 66).

Reference 65 Number of victims of trafficking in persons (2016)

(People)

BreakdownNationality/region	Recognized as a victim of trafficking in persons	Total
Foreign nationals previously in possession of a status of residence	Violators of the Immigration Control Act (Special Permission to Stay in Japan)
Thailand	2	7(7)	9
Cambodia	7	0(0)	7
Philippines	2	3(3)	5
Total	11	10(10)	21

$ ^{*1} $ The breakdown by status of residence of foreign nationals previously in possession of a status of residence was “Temporary Visitor”, 9 persons; “Spouse or Child of Japanese National”, 1 person, and “Entertainer”, 1 person.

$ ^{*2} $ The type of violation of the foreign nationals granted special permission to stay was “illegal overstaying”, 9 persons, and “illegal entry” 1 person.

$ ^{*3} $ The breakdown by the status of residence, before overstaying the authorized period of stay were “Temporary Visitor”, 9 persons.

Reference 66 Changes in the number of victims of trafficking in persons

Year Breakdown	2005	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016
Total	115	9	12	9	26	21
Foreign nationals previously in possession of a status of residence	68	8	8	5	15	11
Violators of the Immigration Control Act (Special permission to stay in Japan)	47(47)	1(1)	4(4)	4(4)	11(11)	10(10)

(People)
### 3. Foreign Nationals Deported for Committing Trafficking in Persons $ ^{*} $

In 2014, the National Police Agency, Ministry of Justice, Supreme Public Prosecutors Office, Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare and the Japan Coast Guard established the “Task Force for the Enforcement of Laws and Regulations Relating to Trafficking in Persons”, and this task force has been conducting improved information sharing and cooperation in order to ensure crackdowns on human trafficking-related offenses, and consequently, two foreign nationals were deported by the Immigration Bureau as perpetrators of human trafficking in 2016 (three persons in the previous year). Their nationality was Bangladesh and Thailand.
# Section 2 Protection of Foreign Domestic Violence Victims

### 1. Outline

Domestic violence, which includes an act that may constitute a crime, is a serious infringement against human rights. Similar to cases of trafficking in persons, an immediate and accurate response is required from a humanitarian point of view.

If the Immigration Bureau identifies a foreign national as a victim of domestic violence, the Bureau will offer secure protection for the physical welfare of the victim in cooperation with the related organizations, and if the victim has applied for an extension of the period of stay or has applied for a change of the status of residence where a change has become necessary owing to domestic violence and the victim finds it difficult to prepare the necessary papers, having suddenly been forced out of his or her home, the Immigration Bureau will give full consideration to the position of the victim and will respond appropriately in a humanitarian manner such as granting permission taking into account individual circumstances. In addition, with regard to victims who are in violation of the Immigration Control Act such as staying beyond their authorized period of stay due to domestic violence, the Immigration Bureau gives sufficient consideration to the case and, depending on the case, will take humanitarian measures, such as granting special permission to stay.

Further, a law to partially amend the Act on the Prevention of Spousal Violence and the Protection of Victims was enforced in January 2008, and the “Basic Policy Relating to Measures to Prevent Spousal Violence and Protect Victims” (*) was formulated by the relevant ministries and agencies, including the Ministry of Justice, based on this law. In light of this basic policy, the Immigration Bureau established its own guidelines on the measures in July of the same year, and in cases where a person is identified as a victim of domestic violence, the Immigration Bureau, taking into full consideration the fact that the victim has been placed in a harsh situation both physically and mentally, deals appropriately according to the physical and mental condition, etc., of the victim, and strives to further protect the victim by cooperating with the Spousal Violence Counseling and Support Center, the Women’s Consulting Offices, police and other related organizations.

### 2. Number of Recognized Foreign Domestic Violence Victims

The Immigration Bureau places emphasis on the protection of victims and treats the victims properly from a humanitarian perspective by ensuring coordination with the agencies concerned, and gives careful consideration to the wishes and situations of the victims in the procedures for such as examination of the status of residence or the deportation procedures while considering their individual circumstances. The number of foreign domestic violence
victims who were recognized in the process of residence examination or the deportation procedures during 2016 was 64 (Reference 67, 68).

The Immigration Bureau took into account the individual situations of the victims and permitted in most of the cases extension of the period of stay or granted special permission to stay.

Reference 67 Number of recognized foreign domestic violence victims (2016)

(People)

Division Nationality/Region	Residence Procedures	Deportation Procedures	Consultations	Others	Total
Philippines	33	0	11	0	44
China	5	0	5	0	10
Brazil	1	0	1	0	2
United Kingdom	1	0	0	0	1
Viet Nam	1	0	0	0	1
Taiwan	0	0	1	0	1
R.O.Korea	0	0	1	0	1
Sri Lanka	0	0	1	0	1
Czech	0	0	1	0	1
Bangladesh	0	0	1	0	1
Peru	0	0	1	0	1
Total	41	0	23	0	64

$ ^{*} $ “China” does not include Taiwan, China (Hong Kong) or China (others).

Reference 68 Changes in the number of victims of domestic violence cases recognized by regional immigration bureau

Year	Regional Immigration Bureaus	Sapporo	Sendai	Tokyo	Nagoya	Osaka	Hiroshima	Takamatsu	Fukuoka	Total
2014	0	3	16	31	7	10	0	8	75
2015	1	1	18	39	18	9	0	9	95
2016	0	4	12	20	10	5	2	11	64

(People)
# なくてはならない 国民保護

消防団・自主防災組織のみなさんへ

写真：鳥取県国民保護訓練で活動する三朝町消防団員

このマークは、国民の保護のための措置を行う人や車両などを識別するための国際的な特殊標章です。

Fire and Disaster Management Agency

http://www.fdma.go.jp/

## 消防団員のみなさんへ

◎大規模なテロや武力攻撃が発生したとき、消防団のみなさんは、安全の確保について十分に配慮されたなかで、次のような活動を行います。

消防団は、警報や避難方法を住民へ伝達します。

消防団は、市町村職員や消防職員と協力し、地域とのつながりを活かした避難住民の誘導を行います。

消防団は、災害への対処などを行います。

## (活動例)

○消火活動などの災害の防御

○消防警戒区域の設定

☐ 常備消防の活動支援

○負傷者の応急手当

○被災情報の収集 など

※1武力攻撃とは、日本に対する外部からの攻撃をいいます。

☐ 弾道ミサイル攻撃

☐ ゲリラ・特殊部隊

による攻撃

☐ 着上陸侵攻

## ☐ 航空攻擊

※2活動に当たっては、消防本部などとの連絡を密にして危険情報の入手に努めてください。
## 訓練のポイント

## 自主防災組織リーダーのみなさんへ

## 防災訓練なども含め様々な機会を通じて いざというときのために備えておきましょう。

## ポイント1【避難】

◎大規模なテロや武力攻撃は、あってはならないことですが、万一、発生したとき住民の方々にとっていただきたい行動は、次のとおりです。自主防災組織リーダーのみなさんは、国などが出す警報や避難の指示に従い、落ち着いて行動するよう呼び掛けましょう。

避難所の把握をはじめ、いざというときの避難の要領や携行する物品などについて確認します。家族と連絡がとれない場合の連絡方法などを話し合っておくことも大切です。

## ポイント2

## 【応急手当】

負傷者への応急手当や臨時の医療施設の開設などを訓練します。

これは、日常において家族がケガをしたときにも役立ちます。

国民保護について

もっと知りたい方は

## ポイント3

## 【救援】

避難所の開設、炊き出し、生活必需品の配布など避難所での避難住民の生活を円滑にするための訓練を行います。

国民保護ポータルサイト

http://www.kokuminhogo.go.jp/

## 警報が出たら？

●サイレンや防災無線の放送内容の確認

●テレビやラジオからの情報収集

## 避難の指示が出たら？

● 避難先、避難方法、携行品や戸締まりの確認

## 事案に応じた避難の方法

・弾道ミサイル攻撃の場合は、当初は近隣の堅牢な建物や地下街などの屋内へ避難し、行政機関からの指示を待ちます。

・ゲリラや特殊部隊による攻撃の場合は、当初は一旦屋内に避難し、その後状況に応じ行政機関からの指示に従い避難します。

## 自主防災組織やボランティアに期待されること

阪神・淡路大震災では、自主防災組織やボランティアの役割の重要性が強く認識されました。こうした自主的な防災活動は、武力攻撃による災害が発生した場合においても、同様に期待されるものです。

## ○避難住民の誘導への協力

避難用バスへの誘導など

○消火、負傷者の搬送、被災者の救助への協力

負傷者の搬送、応急手当など

最近発生したテロ事案など

## ☐救援への協力

避難所での救援物資の配布や炊き出しなど

☐保健衛生の確保への協力

健康相談所の開設支援など
## 有事における 国民保護の ためのしくみ
多くの被害を出した地下鉄サリン事件現場の救護活動

*表紙のマークは、民間防衛を行う人を識別するための国際的な特殊標章です。このマークは、ジュネーヴ諸条約追加議定書Ⅰに規定されており、民間防衛団体、その要員、建物及び物品の保護並びに避難所を識別するためのものです。デザインはオレンジ色地に青の正三角形の図案となっています。
はしがき

平成16年9月に施行された「武力攻撃事態等における国民の保護のための措置に関する法律」（国民保護法）では、「国は、国民の安全を確保するため、その組織及び機能の全てを挙げて自ら国民の保護のための措置を的確かつ迅速に実施するなど、国全体として万全の態勢を整備する責務を有する。」と定められています。

これを受けて、総務省消防庁は、住民の避難、安否情報、武力攻撃災害が発生した場合の消防に関する指示のほか、国民保護法に関する地方公共団体との窓口として、国と地方公共団体を結びつける重要な役割を担っています。

また、地方公共団体などには、国民の保護のための措置として警報の伝達、避難の指示や避難住民の誘導、救援等様々な役割が期待されています。

この冊子は、有事における国民保護のための仕組みを理解するうえで基本となる国民保護法の概要を紹介するとともに、国、地方公共団体等の役割などについてまとめています。国民の保護のための措置を実際に行う立場である都道府県、市町村、消防機関の職員の皆様の理解を深めていただくための資料として役立てば幸いです。

平成19年3月

消防厅
## 目次

第1章 国民保護法成立までの経過 1

第2章 事態対処法の概要 2

第3章 国民保護法の概要と国・地方公共団体の役割 4

第4章 消防の役割 9

第5章 消防庁における国民保護への取組み 12

第6章 地方公共団体の危機管理に関する懇談会 14

Q&A 有事法制 15

用語集 17
## 国民保護法成立までの経過

武力攻撃事態等における我が国の平和と独立並びに国及び国民の安全の確保に関する法律（事態対処法）などの有事関連三法が、平成15年6月に成立しました。事態対処法は、有事法制全体の中核として位置付けられる法律です。

事態対処法の成立を受けて、政府は、国民保護法制整備本部を設置し、国民保護法案の検討に入りました。地方公共団体の意見を反映するため都道府県知事との意見交換会なども開催されました。このような経過を経て国民保護法案が取りまとめられ、平成16年通常国会に提出されました。

国会では、平成16年5月20日の衆議院本会議において、自由民主党・公明党・民主党による共同修正案が可決され、平成16年6月14日、参議院本会議において、衆議院修正後の国民保護法案が可決・成立し、同年9月17日に施行されました。

## 有事法制の検討

## 平成15年6月

事態対処法の成立

〈附带決議〉

1年以内に国民の保護のための

法制の整備を行う。など

国民保護法制整備本部

## 平成16年3月

国民保護法案の提出

〈共同修正案の内容〉

・緊急対処事態への対処を事態対処法に位置付ける。

・現地対策本部を設置することができる旨の規定を追加する。

・訓練を災害対策基本法の防災訓練と連携が図られるよう配慮する。など

## 6 月14日

国民保護法の成立

## 9 月17日

国民保護法の施行
## 第2章

## 事態対処法の概要

前述したように国民保護法は、有事法制の中核として位置付けられる事態対処法に基づいて作成されています。この章では、事態対処法の概要について説明するとともに、事態対処法に定める武力攻撃事態及び緊急対処事態の想定について紹介します。

## 1 ——事態対処法の概要

事態対処法は、第1章で基本となる事項を定めています（右図参照）。

第2章では、武力攻撃事態等への対処のための手続等が定められています。武力攻撃事態等への対処に関する基本的な方針（対処基本方針）を定めることや、対処基本方針に係る対処措置の実施の推進を行う武力攻撃事態等対策本部（対策本部）の設置などについて定めています。

第3章では、必要となる法制の整備に関する事項を、第4章では、緊急対処事態への対処のための措置などについて定めています。

## 事態対処法

## 基本理念

●国、地方公共団体等が国民の協力を得つつ、相互に連携協力し、万全の措置が講じられなければならない。

●日本国憲法の保障する国民の自由と権利が尊重されなければならず、これに制限が加えられる場合にあっても、その制限は武力攻撃事態等に対処するため必要最小限のものに限られ、かつ、公正かつ適正な手続の下に行わなければならない。

## 国の責務

● 国は、我が国の平和と独立を守り、国及び国民の安全を保つため、武力攻撃事態等において、我が国を防衛し、国土並びに国民の生命、身体及び財産を保護する固有の使命を有することから、基本理念にのっとり、組織及び機能のすべてを挙げて、武力攻撃事態等に対処するとともに、国全体として万全の措置が講じられるようにする責務を有する。

## 地方公共団体の責務

●地方公共団体は、当該地方公共団体の地域並びに当該地方公共団体の住民の生命、身体及び財産を保護する使命を有することにかんがみ、国及び他の地方公共団体その他の機関と相互に協力し、武力攻撃事態等への対処に関し、必要な措置を実施する責務を有する。