From Forum News

[brelief@xxxxxxx]

>From Forum News 
People's Forum on Burma
E-mail: QYN02403@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

The Protection of Refugees in Japan 
Shogo Watanabe, Attorney at Law, Secretary General of the People's Forum on
Burma

I became involved in Burma affairs in 1992, and I have mostly been concerned
with the issue of the application by political refugees for refugee status.
In Asia it is Japan that has a large influence on the future of Burma. It
may be said that it has taken too long for an NGO with a clear aim to
support the democratization of Burma to be established in Japan. However, as
Secretary General of the People's Forum on Burma. I am ready to try all
possible means <in order to support the democratization process>. 

Today I would like to report on the treatment of applicants for refugee
status in Japan. It is planned that the Forum will make a request to the
Ministry of Justice regarding this issue. 

The Treatment of Burmese Applicants for Refugee Status in Japan 

1. The Japanese system of admitting refugee status  

(1) The rigid application of the rules and the small number of admittance in
consequence of the '60-Days Rule' 

In Japan, there is a provision that the application for refugee status must
be filed within 60 days of the applicant's landing into Japan. Japan is not
the only country that has such restrictions to the period of time in which
application may be filed. However, Japan is probably the only country that
places the rule itself as a requirement that has to be fulfilled for the
applicant to be admitted as a refugee. 

Many Burmese have only been able to start the application process several
years after their landing into Japan. To enter Japan they are only granted
short term visas, and it is cruel to demand that they should apply right
after their landing. Short term visas cannot be renewed, which easily
results in making the applicants overstayers. It must be noted that the
applications are processed at the immigration office which is the same
office that has the power to send overstayers back to their countries. 

So far all of the 89 Burmese whom the lawyers' group upon request have
assisted, the applications of have been denied refugee status solely because
of failure to satisfy the '60 days rule'. 

Only 8 Burmese have been granted refugee status in Japan, and none of the 8
has participated directly in the 1988 demonstrations. Even from this one
fact one is able obtain an idea of how Japan regards the Burmese activists
towards democracy. 

# The burden of proof

If the applicants' failure to file their applications within 60 days of
their landing into Japan is due to some unavoidable circumstances, then
their applications will be processed and come under substantial examination.
However, it is the applicants that must prove the existence of such
unavoidable circumstances. Moreover, it is also the applicants that must
prove that they have a 'well-founded fear' of being persecuted for political
reasons. 

# The number of admissions of refugee status

In the past 16 years since the current system was established, a little over
200 people have been admitted as refugees. However, about 150 of the 200
people were initially Indochina refugees to start with, which leaves us with
the fact that only 50 to 60 people have been admitted under the current
system as refugees in Japan. 

2. Treatment of the Burmese applicants

There has been no exception to the strict application of the '60-days rule'
concerning the Burmese applicants. One cannot see any protective attitude
towards them. 

For example, to those who applied for refugee status in December 1992,
notifications of denial were sent on 17 November 1994. The applicants
immediately filed appeals, (Here it must be noted that the appeals must be
filed to the immigration office, the same office that makes the initial
decisions. This system is under international criticism. There has been only
one case where an applicant who had initially been denied was granted
refugee status after filing an appeal.) but the interviews for the appeals
were held more than two years later, in February 1997. 

3. The legal status of applicants

In Japan, applicants for refugee status do not obtain any special status, so
if an applicant happens to be an overstayer, s/he faces the risk of being
sent back to his or her country. The immigration office of course does not
go as far as to send such applicants back to their countries by force, but
they do not give the applicants any special status, either. Therefore when
the applicants seek employment, the prospective employers must risk
employing overstayers. Since in Japan if an employer employs an overstayer
the employer may be punished, it results in making prospective employers
reluctant to employ applicants for refugee status. It has once been reported
that an employer seeking to employ an applicant for refugee status asked the
immigration office for referral of the applicant, and the immigration offtce
merely stated that the applicant was an overstayer, thus resulting in the
employer deciding not to employ the applicant. It is extremely difficult for
applicants to make a living. 

Another thing is that in Japan, overstayers cannot join the national health
insurance even if s/he is an applicant for the refugee status. As we have
already seen, it takes a very long time for the decision to be made whether
an applicant shall be admitted refugee status, but there is no medical
insurance for the applicant while the application is being processed. 

4. As we have seen above, it is clear that Japan hardly plays a positive
role in the international arena regarding the Burmese political refugees. It
should be that, as long as the Burmese asylum seekers have the right to
apply for refugee status, they should be guaranteed a legal status. 

I sincerely hope that the reader will have an understanding about the
unstable situation that the Burmese asylum seekers are in. 


http://www2.gol.com/users/brelief/Index.htm