Editorial: Bill to revise Japan's immigration law fails to confront problems

A bill to amend Japan's Immigration Control and Refugee Recognition Act was passed by the House of Representatives Committee on Judicial Affairs last week. From the perspective of respecting foreigners' rights, the proposed revision is still plagued with problems. If legislators rush forward with it, it will create trouble in the future.

Supporters of the bill included the ruling parties and opposition Nippon Ishin (Japan Innovation Party), while the opposition Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan (CDP) and the Japanese Communist Party were against it

The bill is designed to thoroughly ensure that foreigners without a valid status of residence in Japan are sent back to their countries. It would allow Japan to forcibly deport people seeking refugee status in Japan once they have filed a third application, even if their case is still under review.

By global standards, Japan remains extremely hesitant to grant people refugee status. If it restricts applications without amending this stance, it could end up forcing people it should protect to return to dangerous places.

The proposed revision to the law was amended following a suggestion from Nippon Ishin. It now stipulates that information should be gathered on international situations so that officials can make appropriate decisions on refugee status, and that workers screening applications receive the necessary training. But these are things that should be carried out as a matter of course, without having to mention them in the law.

It is necessary to protect refugees in accordance with international rules. It has long been pointed out that the authority to grant refugee status should be separated from the government agencies that control immigration and residency.

During amendment consultations between Japan's ruling and opposition parties, the CDP requested the establishment of a third-party organization to handle recognition of refugee status.

The ruling parties instead proposed specifying in an additional clause that this will be considered after the implementation of the revised law if necessary, but the two sides failed to come to an agreement, and eventually it was not reflected in the bill. As a result, the proposed revision has been left without an essential element.

During committee discussions, it emerged that 201 of the people who have been ordered to leave Japan but have not done so are under the age of 18. There are people who have been born and raised in Japan, but have no valid status of residence, leaving them in unfortunate circumstances. The proposed revision does not sufficiently consider cases such as these.

The proposed legal revisions were first sparked by the prolonged detention of foreign nationals at immigration facilities, but it remains unclear if this issue will be resolved. There is no mechanism for court intervention in the detention process, and no time limits have been set either.

Among the foreigners residing unofficially in Japan, there are many facing circumstances preventing them from returning to their countries. It is hard to say that deliberations have proceeded in light of the actual situation.

The bill is expected to pass the lower house as early as after the end of the "Golden Week" holidays in Japan before being sent to the House of Councillors. To ensure that human rights are not neglected, drastic revisions are indispensable.