Proposed resident registry card for foreigners creates Big Brother concerns

By Andy Sharp

TOKYO —

All foreigners in Japan know him. The 62-year-old isn’t particularly loved — he’s a bit of a square — but we’ve all had to live with him and even take him out with us every day. Like many of his generation, he could keep on working, but he’s recently learned that he may have to settle for his pipe and slippers sooner rather than later.

The Baby Boomer in question is the Certificate of Alien Registration, or gaijin card, a form of ID that non-Japanese residents have been required to carry since the enactment of the Alien Registration Order in May 1947.

It may come as a surprise to learn that, if the government gets its way, the card will be consigned to the bureaucratic scrapheap. The Diet is currently debating bills to replace “gaikokujin torokusho” with a new residency (“zairyu”) card, which would shift administration of alien registration from municipal offices to the Immigration Bureau.

So what are the government’s plans? And, more importantly, what are the implications for foreigners?

If enacted, the bills submitted by the Cabinet in March would revise three laws — the Basic Resident Registration Law, the Immigration Control and Refugee Recognition Act, and the Special Law on Immigration Control — with the government looking to pass them before the end of the current ordinary Diet session on June 3. Once passed, the revisions would become effective in less than three years.

According to the immigration bureau, the government’s main aims are to simplify the administration of foreigners by having the bureau handle nearly all paperwork related to immigration and residency; reduce the burden on foreigners living legally in Japan by extending visa periods and relaxing re-entry rules; ensure all legal aliens join social insurance and state pension schemes; track the movement of foreigners more closely; and clampdown on illegal aliens such as visa overstayers by denying them the right to carry the new card.

However, opposition parties, legal organizations and migrant activists have slammed the revisions. They claim the changes could impose excessive fines for failure to carry the card, make notification of status changes less convenient, and lead to undue dissemination of personal information and excessive monitoring of foreigners.

One aspect of the revisions few would bemoan is the extension of the three-year visa to five years, and the removal of the need to obtain a re-entry permit for residents who leave the country for less than a year. The revisions would also give foreigners some parity with locals by placing them on the same Basic Residents’ Registration Network, or Jumin Kihon Daicho Netowaku, a system the government created to enable easy exchange of information between municipal offices. There is, however, one significant difference.

The Juki-net cards distributed to Japanese do not have numbers printed on them, and the law strictly protects information on the IC chip imbedded in the cards. But as the revisions stand, numbers would be printed on foreigners’ cards, and a greater amount of data could be kept on the chip. While this would ostensibly enable smoother administration, critics have conjured up an image of a regulatory Big Brother tracking foreigners more rigorously than their Japanese neighbors.

Immigration bureau documents state that, in addition to a photograph, the following information would be printed on the cards: name; date of birth; sex; nationality; address; visa status, type and expiry date; card number, issue; date; expiration date; working restrictions; and other necessary information stipulated in justice ministry ordinances. But with the documentation also stating that some or all of this data may be recorded on the chips, opponents fear what may be held in this “other information.”

Masashi Ichikawa, an attorney involved with the Japan Federation of Bar Associations, is concerned about unwarranted access to such personal details.

“The card could be used as identification at places such as banks and libraries, where the chip could be read and the card number recorded,” he says. “I fear that people reading the card would be able to tell how much money is in a person’s account or what books they are borrowing. Authorities such as the police and immigration would be able make inquiries to banks and other places to ask for information on a person’s number.”

Ichikawa also sees disparities between the treatment of foreigners and Japanese. “The law on resident registration for Japanese permits only the card number to be recorded on the IC chip — not the card — and does not make available information from private establishments such as banks. We want foreigners to be protected in the same way as Japanese.”

An Orwellian nightmare?

However, Kazuyuki Motohari of the immigration bureau’s general affairs division says that the IC chip has only been put on the cards to make it easier to share information between government ministries, agencies and local authorities. He also fends off fears of an Orwellian nightmare.

“Only the minimum amount of information would be put on the cards,” he says. “We’ll only perform data matching when absolutely necessary, such as to check whether a person works where they say they do — no more. The IC chip has not been put in for other people to read.”

Opponents point out that the revisions contradict the government’s objective of keeping closer tabs on foreigners. Under the current system, undocumented residents, overstayers and asylum seekers can obtain a gaijin card and access to basic education and health services. But the changes would prevent the issue of zairyu cards to such people — effectively rendering these individuals invisible.

It would still be a crime, however, for foreigners to not always carry the new card. The current law, which the immigration bureau says would not change in the revisions, specifies that aliens must present certification (i.e. the gaijin card) to officials such as immigration inspectors and officers, police officers and maritime safety officers, but mentions nothing about having to show the card as identification to private organizations such as cell phone companies and banks.

The maximum fine for failing to carry the new card would remain at 200,000 yen. Yet the immigration bureau’s Motohari says he cannot recall a case in which a fine has been levied on a legal card-carrying alien who pops out of his house for a short time without it. Even so, opponents are hammering the government to drop this obligation.

“Making all foreigners carry cards is excessive regulation,” Ichikawa says. “There are bad foreigners and also bad Japanese. We don’t think it’s necessary to oblige foreigners, especially permanent residents, to show their card on request. Even the United Nations says it’s wrong to make people with permanent residency in a country carry such a card.”

Azuma Konno, an upper house Democratic Party of Japan lawmaker, says: “The DPJ is considering amending the revisions so people are cautioned rather than fined for failing to carry the cards.”

Notifying authorities of changes in status, such as when you start a new job or get married, is currently relatively straightforward — you just head down to your local municipal office and do the necessary paperwork. The proposed changes, though, could make things more troublesome, as notifications would have to be made at your local immigration office. That means Tokyoites would have to squeeze onto the No. 99 bus at Shinagawa with the rest of humanity to the dreary office in Konan.

Failing or forgetting to notify authorities of a change in status could also come at a heavy price. It would still be possible to change your address at your municipal office, but you must report it within 14 days, and failure to do so within 90 days could mean annulment of your visa — and deportation. Foreigners on spouse visas would have to report to the immigration bureau within 14 days in cases of divorce, or the death of a spouse.

A contentious element is that a visa could be nullified if a person, in cases such as separation or living apart, is not engaged in “marital activities” for three months or more (something many Japanese couples do when one partner is “asked” by his or her company to relocate). The 14-day notification period and 90-day potential cancellation would also apply when foreigners on common visas switch jobs.

The immigration bureau stresses it has considered the plight of foreigners and would take personal circumstances into account when making decisions on visa annulment. “We are considering other more convenient ways to make notifications, such as online or by mail,” Motohari says. “We hope to lessen the burden on foreigners as much as possible.”

The bureau says it has held meetings to gather views from both Japanese and aliens. It also claims it has not widely publicized the content of the revisions because it wants to focus its efforts on getting them passed into law before it provides information to the foreign community.

Opponents, however, insist the government hasn’t really listened to non-Japanese viewpoints and that the insubstantial press coverage has meant few foreigners are aware of the government’s plans, denying them the opportunity to protest.

But with groups such as the Solidarity Network with Migrants Japan organizing rallies and hearings in which opposition lawmakers, Korean groups and legal organizations put counterarguments to the government, the revisions could wind up significantly amended.

Moreover, should the government fall and a DPJ-led administration take office — a distinct possibility this year — before the bills are passed, one 60-something gent could find he has to put his retirement plans on hold for a while.

How will the new card affect you?

Pros
- Typical length of visa stay changed from three years to five years
- No need to obtain a re-entry permit when leaving the country for less than a year
- Assurance that all legal foreigners will be placed on social insurance and state pension schemes
- Administrative procedure simplified
- Possibility to notify authorities of certain changes of status by email or post

Cons
- Notification of most changes of status must be made at Immigration Bureau rather than at local municipal offices
- IC chip on the new card raises privacy concerns
- Asylum seekers and visa overstayers won’t be eligible to receive the cards, resulting in possible loss of basic health and education services
- Possibility of visa annulment if status notifications are not made within a 90-day period

This story originally appeared in Metropolis magazine (www.metropolis.co.jp).

› Login to comment

Latest 15 of 129 Total Comments Show All

Patrick Smash at 10:54 PM JST - 20th May

MagnusGarstin, absolutely towering contributions. Keep up the good work sir.
Patrick Smash at 10:59 PM JST - 20th May

nigelboy, as usual you posted a lot of interesting information. You also seem to have confirmed that I am indeed screwed by this new set of proposals, so thanks for the confirmation. I like Japan, but I don't trust the motives of the politicians coming up with this.

I think 39% tax (I'll go along with your figure) is quite high for a country that can't offer free healthcare, free childbirth, free education or the return of the pension money people pay in to the system. The giovernment debt is almost double GDP, making further (large) tax rises inevitable too. The population continues to age, the economy is in record decline. The swollen bureaucracy does a lot better off the taxpayer than young people with families eh.
MagnusGarstin at 11:05 PM JST - 20th May

MagnusGarstin, absolutely towering contributions. Keep up the good work sir.

I'm honoured and flattered by your kind words Patrick.

Thanks again, Magnus.
nigelboy at 11:52 PM JST - 20th May

nigelboy, as usual you posted a lot of interesting information.

Do yourself a favor and petition your own (U.K.) government to do something about your dilemma.

I think 39% tax (I'll go along with your figure) is quite high for a country that can't offer free healthcare, free childbirth, free education or the return of the pension money people pay in to the system.

Then do yourself a favor by enrolling yourself in private supplemental health care and private pension from the money that you would paid if you're in U.K.

Stop acting like a "victim" and do something like a responsible adult.
womanforwomen at 08:59 AM JST - 21st May

Kudos, Magnus. The best is genetically-unique hosts.
Patrick Smash at 09:44 AM JST - 21st May

nigelboy, you really are a one aren't you. I did all that (privately and paid for it) but can't afford that and shakai-hoken and to raise a family with almost zero assistance. You don't have kids over here on a medium income, so you have no way to understand. But thank you for your mature Japanese advice. Head Office would be very proud of you as always.
Orchid64 at 09:45 AM JST - 21st May

Anyone who doesn't think this isn't about fleecing foreigners by forcing them to pay into the failing pension system is fooling themselves. The Japanese government knows that the 25-year rule will ensure that few people collect the Japanese pension after paying into it and the system is not reciprocal in most countries. I'm surprised that the writer of this article lists being a part of the state pension scheme as a "pro". It's essentially throwing your money away for 99% of foreign people working in Japan.

I wouldn't have a problem if there were conditions depending on status or if the system had a much lower number of years for paying in before you could collect (say 5 years - the length of the new visa). For instance, permanent residents should pay into the pension system, but this looks like it's going to be a blanket laid over people who come for a year or who stay for 20 years.

The root of the problem is going to be that foreigners aren't paid the same as Japanese people or working under the same conditions. Forcing them to pay into various social systems (which they almost certainly will not utilize) places a burden on them which is not placed on the Japanese. Pension payments, ward taxes, and health insurance costs are supplemented for salaried employees in Japanese companies. "Temporary employees" (or contract workers) are currently either slipping under the wire, having their expenses augmented by their temp agencies, or paying reduced expenses because they are married to a salaried employee. Foreigners typically have none of these expenses covered in part by their employers so it's a far bigger bite from their wages than for the average Japanese.

In the end, such a system will make Japan an even less attractive place for foreign workers and likely drive up the cost of having foreign employees for those companies that hire them because it'll be harder to make it worthwhile to be here without increasing wages to compensate for all the new expenses. I'm not sure that ultimately that is not the goal of all of this. Fewer gaijin in Japan and taking more money from those who are here with the knowledge that they'll rarely have to pay any of it back.
nigelboy at 03:08 AM JST - 22nd May

Orchid64

The problem with your argument is that Japanese nationals who reside in countries overseas who have not signed the reciprocal agreement are under the same dilemma which is essentially paying into a system that's not going to get anything back but you don't hear them whining as much.

Maybe it's because most of them still believe that rather than thinking as this is for your future benenefit, pension payments are "to provide insurance benefits against old-age, disability, death for all people in order to prevent deterioration of the stability of the livelihood of the people through **national solidarity **and thus to secure and improve the decent standard of living of the people." In other words, consider it as a support for the old-age population of today. Same with national health insurance. The amount of premiums+out of pocket expenses versus that of actual medical costs for the younger adult population is far net positive while for older population, the amount falls into a negative. But the system of offering low premiums and low out of pocket costs for the elderly can only be achieved if everybody especially the young participates in it.

And for a person who paid in the system for 20 years, by god pay another five years so that you could qualify. Whether that means saving now to pay for that remaining five years or to continue working until 25 year requirement, it is up to you. But to forfeit the qualification after 20 years is just plain stupid.
bdiego at 05:12 AM JST - 22nd May

Wow, Patrick actually made two posts in a row without being racist before turning back to his old ways.
taiko666 at 08:42 AM JST - 22nd May
"...you don't hear them whining as much."

Of course they don't whine, because their host country treats them with dignity, not like some potential criminal to be monitored and fleeced. For example, in the UK a Japanese national on a non-tourist visa:
- can opt out of the state pension scheme entirely
- is not obliged to carry any form of ID
- can vote in local elections
- can become a UK citizen (and keep their J-passport) after 5 years (3 if married to a UK citizen)
- cam enjoy free health care from day 1 regardless of whether they're making contributions
XXXXX at 03:14 AM JST - 23rd May

shift administration of alien registration from municipal offices to the Immigration Bureau.

that sucks.

track the movement of foreigners more closely

maybe that's the 'main aim' after all.

Save the money to be used in IC cards for something else.
nigelboy at 03:41 AM JST - 23rd May

can opt out of the state pension scheme entirely

Yes. Due to the UK-Japan Social Securities Agreement stated above.

is not obliged to carry any form of ID

I think most people carry ID without the obligation.

can vote in local elections

Japan is not part of EU

can become a UK citizen (and keep their J-passport) after 5 years (3 if married to a UK citizen)

Same. J-gov isn't in the business of taking passports away. They just "assume" that if you naturalize to Japanese, you relinquished your citizenship with the former country.

cam enjoy free health care from day 1 regardless of whether they're making contributions

I don't think you can put "enjoy" and NHS in the same sentence. Most Japanese residing in U.K. chooses private (for obvious reasons) despite already paying for the NHS (through taxes).
amakuri at 10:21 AM JST - 23rd May

Im still residing in Japan so Im not sure how effective this is, but I found a website company that can help get tax and pension payments back once you leave the country (appears you have to do it within two years). Does anyone have any experience with this, and I wonder if you can get the full amount of pension back or just part? Something to consider perhaps if they bring in the changes....

http://www.taxback.com/japan-pension-refund.asp?Lng=jp
nigelboy at 10:26 AM JST - 23rd May

To Amakuri:

http://www.sia.go.jp/e/pdf/english.pdf
amakuri at 04:05 PM JST - 25th May

NigelBoy: Thanks for the link. What I am still unclear of is whether or not I can get the full pension entitlement made into my Australian pension account (either lump-sum or in installments) should I withdraw and return home before the 25 year requirement which is presently law. I understand from your both links above that the application for lump-sum withdraw payments can be made before or after leaving Japan.

I guess we will have to wait and see if the new bill is passed in the Diet this week and it`s implications for everyone.