A just enacted bill to revise the Immigration Control and Refugee Recognition Law falls short of meaningful reform to change Japan’s immigration control system. It neglects the basic principle that every individual deserves to be treated with human dignity, irrespective of nationality or ethnicity, and protected when the need arises.

The revision passed by the Upper House on June 9 is designed to prevent prolonged detentions for people who overstayed their visas. Critics contend it could result in deporting refugee applicants to face persecution. Shocking revelations have emerged concerning the screening of applications for refugee status and the treatment of detainees.

The public remains deeply distrustful of the justice and immigration control authorities. The government, which pushed through the flawed bill, the ruling coalition, which rammed it through the upper chamber, and the two opposition parties which went along with it--Nippon Ishin (Japan Innovation Party) and the Democratic Party for the People--all bear heavy responsibility for the mess.

LOST SIGHT OF ORIGINAL GOAL

The legislative initiative was prompted by a disturbing incident in 2019 in which a Nigerian detainee in Nagasaki Prefecture died from starvation while protesting his prolonged detention.

Unlike arrest and detention of suspects as part of the criminal justice procedures, a court-issued warrant is not required to place an overstayer in a detention center. Detentions can last for several years. During the 14 years since 2007, a total of 17 detainees died at immigration facilities.

Just like any other place, detention centers should be safe havens as far as human rights are concerned. The death of the detainee was supposed to act as a strong impetus for legislative action to overhaul the immigration control system.

But the bill, drafted by the government after discussions at an advisory panel of experts, got bogged down on ways to deal with foreign nationals who refuse to be sent back home and repeatedly apply for refugee status to avoid deportation.

The ban on deporting asylum seekers while their applications are being processed was replaced by a provision to exempt those who have already twice unsuccessfully applied to be recognized as a refugee.

The bill does not offer a system under which a court or other independent body can get involved in assessing the appropriateness of decisions concerning the incarceration of foreign nationals overstaying their visas and extension of their detention. Many countries have adopted such a system to ensure fair procedures.

A government’s decisions on whether to accept foreign nationals seeking permanent residence are naturally based on prevailing conditions and policies. Such decisions are not easy for any nation. But they need to be based at least on universal values of human rights.

A bill to revise the Immigration Control and Refugee Recognition Law was first submitted to the Diet in 2021 but eventually scrapped. A similar bill was then introduced this year. The Special Rapporteurs of the U.N. Human Rights Council called on the Japanese government to revise the bill both times, stating that proposed amendments to the law “appeared to fall short of international human rights standards in several aspects of the protection of the human rights of migrants.” But the justice and immigration control authorities dismissed the call in both cases, saying it was not legally binding.

The root of the various issues that cropped up lies in a system that gives the authorities broad and strong discretion over decisions on detention and recognition as a refugee, matters which concern the life and freedom of the individuals involved.

REFUGEE RECOGNITION SYSTEM

Under the revised law, it will be vital to recognize foreign nationals who need to be protected in their first or second application for refugee status. But Diet deliberations on the bill raised serious doubt about whether the current process is fit for fulfilling this requirement.

The refugee recognition process is a two-tier system. Applications for refugee status are first screened by immigration control authorities. When an asylum seeker appeals a decision to reject his or her application, refugee examination counselors--private-sector experts working in teams of three--will then examine and assess the appeal for the final decision by the justice minister.

The justice and immigration control authorities based their case for the proposed revision on remarks by some refugee examination counselors that very few people deserve to be recognized as refugees among applicants for refugee status. But serious doubt has been raised about the fairness of the process. This is because only a small number of specific individuals among 111 refugee examination counselors deal with disproportionately large numbers of cases which the authorities want to be handled quickly.

Justice Minister Ken Saito asserts that the process has been handled appropriately. He was referring to the fact that the government won in 104 out of the 109 cases of administrative litigation over the fairness of decisions to reject applications for refugee recognition heard by courts during the five years through 2022.

But deporting an asylum seeker who deserves to be recognized as a refugee could lead to an unrecoverable mistake resulting in serious persecution. The fact that courts ordered the government to revoke as many as five decisions should be taken seriously. More than one such ruling has been handed down since the start of this year.

It is also necessary to recognize the fact that it is hard for asylum seekers to take legal action, given their precarious situation.

DISTRUST REMAINS STRONG

One researcher who testified before the Lower House in April expressed strong concern about the bill, contending that passing it would be tantamount to indirectly pressing the button to carry out the execution of an innocent person. This warning should not be forgotten.

The Diet should continue considering a system to entrust the work to screen applications for refugee status to a committee independent of the government, a proposal included in an opposition-sponsored rival bill.

To be fair, the amendments that have been enacted include some elements that could be beneficial for asylum seekers. A new system has been established to allow unauthorized immigrants to stay with their families and friends without being detained while their cases are processed.

The question is whether this new system will lead to a shift away from the principle of detaining foreign nationals. But here’s the catch: Under the system, custodians are required to report on the activities of the individuals for whom they are responsible. In a survey of groups supporting unauthorized immigrants conducted by a nonprofit organization, most of the respondents said they were unable or unwilling to serve as custodians.

The system should be implemented in a way that can win the cooperation of numerous citizens.

Another improvement allows people seeking refugee status to apply for a “special stay permit” by the justice minister. The government should take an activist attitude toward allowing overstaying foreign nationals who have already established the foundations of their livelihoods in Japan to stay legally.

Many children who grew up in Japan have had to leave because their parents did not have residence status. Clearly, sending children back to their countries of nationality, even when they do not speak the language, is unacceptable from a humanitarian viewpoint.

The public will closely and rigorously monitor how the revised law will be enforced by immigration control authorities.

To regain the public’s trust, the government needs to demonstrate its commitment to respecting human dignity in dealing with cases of immigration violations.

--The Asahi Shimbun, June 10