Japan now able to deport people with multiple failed asylum claims

several European countries that typically accept more than 10,000 asylum seekers annually

"lags far behind", Japan is actually well early in front of all these occidental countries to reject immigrants.

Check out the results from yesterday and see if the citizens of European countries are happy about that.

Japan won’t ever accept migrants in large numbers as it would be hard pressed to cope with the backlash from the Japanese people.

Large numbers of foreigners and crime rising would be most unacceptable.

Is actually crazy that it took this long for such a law to exist. What's the point of rejecting a application if you can apply for it again and again.

one year...went home for Christmas...bought my little sister pearls...she asked for them...the customs guy asks if I have anything to declare...I told him I did and presented the gift & receipt...but in the next lane was some commotion...some guy from

Shri-Lanka who had been granted asylum (in Canada) had returned there for a "holiday"...the guy in my lane said they had bigger fish to fry than me that day..."Merry Christmas"...was the last thing he told me before he told me to leave

It sounds fair to me. What’s wrong with 3 strikes and you’re out?

Apply, fail, detention, deportation.... Not difficult is it?

Makes sense.

"... several European countries that typically accept more than 10,000 asylum seekers annually."

Which is a big reason why right wing parties are expected to win big in several elections this spring and summer.

Good to know the long overdue revision of the immigrations law is finally in effect. But how is it that asylum seekers keep coming to Japan when the “United States and several European countries…typically accept more than 10,000 asylum seekers annually”?

Against my better judgement, I'm leaving a comment.

Most of the people here seem to be quite secure in their status of residence. Good for you. Now, Japan's refugee application system is in violation of international law as it is and has a laughably low acceptance rate. If you think over 99 percent of applicants are frauds, fine.

Also, far right candidates sweeping elections in Europe being indicative of the bad effects of accepting immigrants is like saying Hitler was right because he won in the 1930s. Tapping into people's prejudices during time of crisis is easiest way to score political points. The LDP is doing that now. It's refugees, easy scapegoats now, but the government is going for PR holders next.

It's ironic this article is just under another one about Japan's shrinking economy. Study after study has shown that immigration is a net benefit for countries. The fact that a lot of people think their neighbour having a different ethnic background from them is an affront doesn't change that.

I even wonder why people from developing countries would choose Japan at the very beginning.

I always thought that part of the problem is deportees must pay their airfares.

my previous post was rather flippant(sp?)...

It is a serious subject...but as clearly obvious in my previous post...it is taken advantage of...and my other relative who lives in the UK is involved with this...most of the refugees they get are young strong men likely from money'd families who can afford the bribes...most of the asylum seeking reality are bought and paid for...

Great story from nukkuheddo!

'one year...went home for Christmas...bought my little sister pearls...she asked for them...the customs guy asks if I have anything to declare...I told him I did and presented the gift & receipt...but in the next lane was some commotion...some guy from

Shri-Lanka who had been granted asylum (in Canada) had returned there for a "holiday"...the guy in my lane said they had bigger fish to fry than me that day..."Merry Christmas"...was the last thing he told me before he told me to leave.'

If my neighbors consist of a "dysfunctional family," I shall not be expected to take in the children as "refugees." That is where the police and family services come in...But nations are sovereign or semi-sovereign: let us hope that police and family services never come to resemble, let us say, the United Nations! The fact that Japan "lags far behind" other nations in recklessly opening its doors ought to be encouraging...

How desperate or endangered does one have to be to qualify as a "refugee"? If an American from Chicago were to show up in Switzerland or Monaco, claiming to seek asylum from street gang violence, how do you think s/he would be treated?

Has Europe gained anything from accepting Arab immigrants?

They bring their own culture to other countries and never assimilate.

Is it really a good thing for the people of a country to accept such a race and see an increase in crime rates, job losses for the country's citizens, and the rise of far-right parties?

I would love to hear about any countries that have been successful with Arab or African immigrants.

The only immigrants that are accepted in Japan are those welcomed by a few business owners as cheap labor.

To be honest, the only ethnic groups that don't cause friction as immigrants are the Japanese who have assimilated into America or Brazil.

If you think over 99 percent of applicants are frauds, fine.

It helps that one of the most famous applicants was someone who entered on a Student Visa, stopped going to school (thus voiding the visa), went out with some man and began to work (thus violating the visa further), eventually had some kind of breakup. Only then did she turn herself in, and tried to apply for asylum on the theory that her ex-boyfriend (not the government) would kill her if she returned to Sri Lanka. An ex-boyfriend that lives in Japan ...

Study after study has shown that immigration is a net benefit for countries.

If you think purely in GDP terms, yes, but in terms of social strife ... etc, less so. Studies are better equipped to valuate the increase in GDP over the decrease in social strife.

We also have to consider that a refugee is someone who can't get in through the front door. Situations generally do not happen all at once, and when things go bad, those that can would first try to emigrate using more conventional routes that usually require them to be a prospective asset. Refugees are thus those who can't get out that way, and as a group are less of an asset.

The West and Russia bomb their country, create refuge, if you refuse them, they call you bigot while they continue bombing their countries.

Great world we live in.

Now, Japan's refugee application system is in violation of international law.

No country has the right to demand another to take in refugees.

Also, far right candidates sweeping elections in Europe being indicative of the bad effects of accepting immigrants is like saying Hitler was right because he won in the 1930s.

No. It's indicative of people being tired of paying for refugees who, in many cases, are not needy, but greedy.

It's ironic this article is just under another one about Japan's shrinking economy. Study after study has shown that immigration is a net benefit for countries.

Immigration of individuals with skills benefits the receiving country.

The fact that a lot of people think their neighbour having a different ethnic background from them is an affront doesn't change that.

It's the difference in morals that puts most people off.

YotomayaToday  06:32 pm JST

Now, Japan's refugee application system is in violation of international law as it is and has a laughably low acceptance rate. If you think over 99 percent of applicants are frauds, fine.

Nonsense. No such "International Law" exists.

While international agreements such as the Convention Relating to the Statis of Refugees (1951) and it;s 1967 Protocol as well as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights law sets out obligations, individual nations retain sovereignty over their immigration policies and border controls. This means that while they should not return individuals to situations where they face danger (non-refoulement), they have discretion over how they process asylum applications and manage their asylum systems.

Likewise, that Japan has a low rate of acceptance of Refugees and Asylum seekers, laughably or not, is entirely within Japan's sovereign right and violates nothing.

Only European Country Not Suffering Is The County That Didn't Allow Immigrants All The Western World Is Burning In Jihad Revolution Now So Japan Should Sent Illegal Immigrants Faster To Save Time N Resources Of Country

Shouldn't they be deported after one claim has been denied?

The Japanese government has got this right - three attempts at proving one is a genuine refugee is enough - then it's time to return to one's nation.

The Japanese government has looked at the issues asylum seekers from places like Africa (the entire continent), Iran, Syria, Turkey, Afghanistan etc bring with them to other wealthy nations, and are seeking to prevent this. Issues like gangs forming, violence against the local population, disrespect towards women and so on.

Unfortunately those parts of the world - Africa, the Middle East and parts of Asia - are not exactly sending their best.

Good.

Now teach the US how to THROW OUT all the illegals in that country.

Unfortunately those parts of the world - Africa, the Middle East and parts of Asia - are not exactly sending their best.

Do you think those countries are 'sending' people to Japan?

Issues like gangs forming, violence against the local population, disrespect towards women and so on

I agree. The yakuza don't need competition with their corruption & violence.

How fortunate is it for Japan to have so many people applying for asylum when its Native population Is rapidly declining by leaps and bounds. It is a rigid (frigid?) bureaucratic policy that has caused, by one estimate, a situation where Japan might not exist in 50 years due to us declining population. Japan should allow the applicants who are denied asylum a special category were they can live in rural villages with declining populations and after a specific time will be allowed to apply for Japanese immigrant status. This will fulfill two major purposes which are to revitalize rural areas and increase Japan’s population

PacificpilotToday 05:12 am JST

How are you going to prevent people from moving to Tokyo? Have a Chinese style registration system?

I even wonder why people from developing countries would choose Japan at the very beginning.

Safety, opportunity, universal healthcare, reliable transportation, technology, amazing cuisine, employment for all - there are many, many reasons. A quick scan of Japan-related pages on social media tells us that for so many, Japan is the "dream country" so many in developing nations aspire to be in.

Japan has a huge population and is far from dying out.

With the advances in computer tech (Nvidia especially) there will likely be a massive rise in robot aides, sooner rather than later.

Therefore, no need for immigrants.

kurisupisuToday 06:45 am JST

Japan has a huge population and is far from dying out.

With the advances in computer tech (Nvidia especially) there will likely be a massive rise in robot aides, sooner rather than later.

Therefore, no need for immigrants.

The problem is the mechanical technology is also super primitive everywhere. Can you imagine changing grandma's diaper with a telepresence robot, let alone an ai?

This means that while they should not return individuals to situations where they face danger (non-refoulement), they have discretion over how they process asylum applications and manage their asylum systems.

I'd argue Japan is leaning very heavily into the latter part. I have a problem with that interpretation of that convention, as do Amnesty International.

It's the difference in morals that puts most people off.

"People from other (poorer) countries have different (i.e. lower) moral standards." Cool!

YotomayaToday  08:35 am JST

This means that while they should not return individuals to situations where they face danger (non-refoulement), they have discretion over how they process asylum applications and manage their asylum systems.

I'd argue Japan is leaning very heavily into the latter part. I have a problem with that interpretation of that convention, as do Amnesty International.

Be that as it may, Japan is not in violation of any "International Laws" and is simply exercising it'ss overeign rights as all nations do.

I really couldn't care less what an NGO like Amnesty International says. Maybe if I see them actually working on how the Tibetans and Uighurs are treated by China, or the Rohyngyas I might care. But I see Amnesty Intnl persistently challenging small issues in developed countries where the expected backlash is small. Another example of an organization founded on morally correct issues but now really existing to preserve itself.

Maybe if I see them actually working on how the Tibetans and Uighurs are treated by China, or the Rohyngyas I might care.

They do mention these issues as well, and suggesting they should somehow make ruthless dictatorships "behave" is absurd. At this point this is just whataboutism. Japan doesn't act according to treaties and conventions it's agreed to on refugees as well as racial discrimination. I'd pull out the names, but I don't see a good-faith debate happening here, so I'll just leave it with that.

Just a question: Does Japan offers the same asylum policy to migrants from Arab Muslim countries compared to migrants from Ukraine, for example? ;)

First of all, are people who can come to Japan by plane refugees?

Japan is not violating any international law in its treatment of immigrants or refugees.

Unless it is clearly stated which provisions of international law it is violating, it is simply hate speech.

"People from other (poorer) countries have different (i.e. lower) moral standards." Cool!

Not necessarily. You have good and bad in all sorts of countries. I'll repeat my comment.

It's the difference in morals that puts most people off.

If you have someone who thinks it's okay to assault someone because you don't have the same religious beliefs, that's going to be a problem in a country where people don't do that.