Refugee Law and Practice in Japan: a Comparative Critique and Proposals

Abstract

It is the argument of this thesis that the law and practice with respect to refugee protection in Japan is seriously flawed when set against the purpose of international treaties and standards. This entire area is in dire need of reform. CHAPTER ONE outlines the research objectives. CHAPTER TWO explains that the historical factors that prompted Japan to become a member of the international refugee regime are one reason for the current failure of refugee protection in Japan. CHAPTER THREE develops a comparative analysis of the experiences of New Zealand and Australia to explore what factors historically spurred change in refugee status determination in these states. The cause of Japan's procedural problems is identified as "institutional under-development". CHAPTER FOUR scrutinises Japan's performance in the assessment of refugee claims with reference to the comparative experiences of other states and other analytic factors. The reason the term "refugee" has been so narrowly circumscribed in Japan is because of the lack of knowledge of the Japanese protection players. The situation may be articulated as "institutional lack of knowledge". CHAPTER FIVE considers the rights of refugees. Japanese practice on the provision of refugee rights can be encapsulated as "institutional refusal". The CONCLUSION argues that Japan should resolve these systemic failures and take innovative action towards refugee protection.