Obtaining a status of residence (在留資格 - zairyū shikaku) is the cornerstone of a foreign national's ability to live and work legally in Japan. However, this status is not immutable; it can be revoked by the Minister of Justice under specific circumstances outlined in Article 22-4 of Japan's Immigration Control and Refugee Recognition Act (hereinafter "Immigration Control Act"). Such revocation can have severe consequences, potentially leading to deportation. This article examines the primary grounds for the revocation of a status of residence, drawing upon judicial interpretations and case law to illustrate how these provisions are applied in practice.

The Legal Framework: Article 22-4 of the Immigration Control Act

Article 22-4 empowers the Minister of Justice to revoke a foreign national's status of residence if certain conditions are met. The intent behind this provision is to maintain the integrity of Japan's immigration system by addressing situations where a status was obtained improperly or where the foreign national is no longer fulfilling the conditions upon which their stay was permitted. The key grounds for revocation generally fall into two broad categories: obtaining status through deceitful means and failing to engage in the primary activities associated with the granted status.

Ground 1: Obtaining Status by Deceit or Other Wrongful Means (不正手段 - Fusei Shudan)

A significant portion of Article 22-4 deals with situations where a foreign national has acquired their status of residence, or permissions related to it (like landing permission, permission for change of status, or extension of period of stay), through fraudulent or improper methods. This can include making false statements, submitting forged or falsified documents, or intentionally concealing material facts.

Japanese courts have consistently upheld revocations based on clear evidence of such deceit. The materiality of the false statement or document is often a key consideration – it must be something that, if the truth were known, would likely have led to a different decision by immigration authorities.

• False Declarations Regarding Immigration History or Eligibility:
  A case decided by the Tokyo District Court on June 20, 2014 (Heisei 25 (Gyo-U) Nos. 647, 654-656), involved a foreign national who, despite being within a landing denial period due to a previous deportation, made false declarations of having no prior deportation history. This individual also submitted a fraudulent employment certificate to obtain a Certificate of Eligibility (CoE). The court found these actions constituted obtaining landing permission by deceitful means under Article 22-4, Paragraph 1, Item (i), leading to the revocation of their status. [cite: 90]
• Use of False Identity Details:
  Obtaining a status of residence, even permanent residency, using false identity details (such as a different name or date of birth) is a serious offense. The Tokyo District Court, on July 25, 2013 (Heisei 24 (Gyo-U) No. 662), dealt with a case where an individual had acquired permanent resident status based on false personal information. The court recognized that such a permit was obtained through improper means and was therefore subject to revocation by the Minister of Justice under Article 22-4, Paragraph 1. [cite: 90]
• Misrepresentation in Applications for Spousal Status:
  Applications for statuses based on marriage, such as "Spouse or Child of Japanese National," are often closely scrutinized for the genuineness of the marital relationship. False statements regarding cohabitation or the nature of the relationship can lead to revocation.
  The Tokyo District Court, on October 10, 2014 (Heisei 26 (Gyo-U) No. 42), upheld a revocation where an individual made false statements about cohabiting with their Japanese spouse in a status renewal application. The court deemed these false statements material enough to have potentially misled the authorities in their decision to grant the renewal, thereby falling under the ambit of submitting "documents with false statements" (in this specific context, likely Article 22-4, Paragraph 1, Item (iv), which pertains to renewals or changes of status obtained by deceit). [cite: 90] A similar outcome was seen in another Tokyo District Court case on March 8, 2013 (Heisei 24 (Gyo-U) No. 232), where false claims of cohabitation with a Japanese spouse led to the revocation of the foreign national's status. [cite: 90]
• Fraudulent Information for Change of Status Applications:
  Providing false information about intended employment or qualifications during an application to change status is also grounds for revocation. The Tokyo District Court, on May 12, 2011 (Heisei 22 (Gyo-U) No. 307), affirmed the revocation of a status that had been changed based on a purported employment offer from a company where the applicant had no genuine intention of working, supported by falsified documentation. [cite: 90] This was seen as obtaining the change of status through deceit.

These cases illustrate that any attempt to mislead immigration authorities through false information or documents at any stage – initial landing, renewal, or change of status – can result in the revocation of the granted status.

Ground 2: Failure to Engage in Permitted Activities

Another major category for revocation involves situations where a foreign national is not genuinely pursuing the primary activities for which their status of residence was granted.

For Work or Study Statuses (Annexed Table I types)

Article 22-4, Paragraph 1, Item (v) of the Immigration Control Act stipulates that if a person residing under a status listed in the left-hand column of Annexed Table I of the Act (which includes most work visas like "Engineer/Specialist in Humanities/International Services," "Intra-company Transferee," "Skilled Labor," "Student," etc.) has failed to continuously engage in the activities specified in the right-hand column of that table corresponding to their status for three months or more, their status may be revoked. An exception is made if there is a "justifiable reason" (正当な理由 - seitō na riyū) for not engaging in such activities.

What constitutes a "justifiable reason" is not exhaustively defined and is assessed on a case-by-case basis. It might include situations like legitimate illness preventing work or study, periods of unemployment while actively seeking a new position within the same visa category (within reasonable limits), company-ordered leave or training, or other circumstances genuinely beyond the individual's control that temporarily prevent them from performing their primary activity. However, simply neglecting one's duties or studies, or using the visa as a pretext for other purposes, would not qualify.

• Significant Discrepancy in Work Activities:
  A case before the Tokyo District Court on May 30, 2014 (Heisei 23 (Gyo-U) No. 679, Heisei 24 (Gyo-U) No. 430), involved an individual with an "Engineer/Specialist in Humanities/International Services" status. The court found that the actual work conditions, particularly remuneration which was structured as a "success fee," drastically differed from the initially submitted employment contract. This led to the conclusion that the foundational basis for the granted status (i.e., the original terms of employment and activity) had been lost during the one-year period of stay. The individual was deemed not to be consistently performing the activities for which the status was granted, leading to the revocation. [cite: 90]
• Abandonment of Studies or Unauthorized Work by Students:
  The Tokyo District Court, on November 19, 2012 (Heisei 24 (Gyo-U) No. 6), upheld the revocation of a "Student" visa. The foreign national had repeatedly engaged in unauthorized part-time work exceeding permitted hours and conditions, and their poor school attendance indicated a diminished intent to study. This combination suggested that the primary purpose of stay was no longer education. [cite: 90]

For Spouse or Child Statuses

Article 22-4, Paragraph 1, Item (vi) specifically addresses those residing under statuses like "Spouse or Child of Japanese National," "Spouse or Child of Permanent Resident," or "Long-Term Resident" (in certain family-related contexts). If such a person has failed to continuously engage in the activities as a spouse or child (e.g., maintaining a genuine marital or family life) for six months or more without a justifiable reason, their status can be revoked. This provision targets situations like sham marriages or where a genuine marital relationship has irretrievably broken down, and the foreign national is no longer living as a spouse but continues to hold the spousal visa.

• Sham Marriages:
  The Tokyo District Court, on June 26, 2014 (Heisei 25 (Gyo-U) No. 447), dealt with a Chinese national whose status of residence was revoked. It was found that she had entered into a sham marriage with a Japanese man solely to obtain a "Spouse of Japanese National" status and had subsequently renewed this status based on false submissions about the continuation of the marital relationship. [cite: 90] The lack of genuine spousal activity was central.

Other Grounds for Revocation

While deceit and non-activity are the most commonly cited grounds from the provided case law, Article 22-4 also includes newer grounds such as:

• Failure to Notify Change of Residence (Article 22-4(1)(vii)): For mid-to-long-term residents, failing to notify the authorities of a new place of residence within 90 days of moving without a justifiable reason.
• Notifying a False Place of Residence (Article 22-4(1)(viii)): Knowingly providing a false address to immigration authorities.

These reflect an increasing emphasis on maintaining accurate residential records for foreign nationals.

The Revocation Procedure: The Opinion Hearing (意見聴取 - Iken Chōshu)

Before the Minister of Justice can revoke a status of residence, Article 22-4, Paragraph 2 mandates that an immigration inquiry officer conduct an "opinion hearing" with the foreign national concerned. This is a crucial due process requirement.

• The foreign national (or their representative) must be notified in advance of the date and place of the hearing and the facts constituting the grounds for the potential revocation.
• At the hearing, the foreign national has the right to state their opinion, submit evidence, and ask questions. They may also have legal counsel or other representation present.
• A record of the hearing is prepared.

The Tokyo District Court, on June 28, 2011 (Heisei 22 (Gyo-U) No. 234), confirmed that where a foreign national received an opinion hearing notice, attended the hearing, understood the nature of the investigation into potential revocation, and was able to state their opinion, procedural fairness requirements regarding notice and opportunity to be heard were met. [cite: 91]

However, if a foreign national fails to attend the opinion hearing without a "justifiable reason," the Minister of Justice may proceed with the revocation without conducting the hearing (Article 22-4, Paragraph 5). The Tokyo District Court, on May 12, 2011 (Heisei 22 (Gyo-U) No. 307), upheld a revocation where the individual, despite being notified more than two weeks in advance, failed to appear for the hearing without providing a valid excuse. [cite: 91]

It's important to note, as highlighted by the Tokyo District Court on January 31, 2013 (Heisei 23 (Gyo-U) No. 759), that the scope of the revocation review (and thus the opinion hearing) is primarily focused on whether the specific grounds for revocation listed in Article 22-4, Paragraph 1 are met (e.g., was there deceit, was there a cessation of primary activity?). Broader humanitarian considerations, such as the welfare of the foreign national's children, while potentially relevant for a subsequent application for Special Permission to Stay if deportation proceedings commence, are not typically the primary factors in the revocation decision itself. [cite: 91]

Consequences of Status Revocation

The consequences of having a status of residence revoked depend on the specific grounds for revocation:

1. Immediate Deportability (for serious deceit):
   If the status is revoked under Article 22-4, Paragraph 1, Item (i) (e.g., obtaining landing permission itself by serious deceit, such as using a forged passport or false identity) or Item (ii) (similar deceit regarding special landing permissions), the foreign national becomes subject to immediate deportation proceedings under Article 24, Item (2-2) of the Immigration Control Act.
2. Order to Depart (for other grounds):
   If the status is revoked for other reasons, such as:
   • Obtaining a change of status or extension of period of stay by deceit (Article 22-4(1)(iii) or (iv)).
   • Failing to engage in the primary activity for 3 months or more (Item v).
   • Spouse visa holders failing to engage in spousal activities for 6 months or more (Item vi).
   • Failure to notify residential address changes (Items vii or viii).
     In these cases, the foreign national is not immediately deported. Instead, the Minister of Justice will specify a period, not exceeding 60 days, within which the individual must depart from Japan (Article 22-4, Paragraph 7). During this period, the individual is considered to be without a status of residence but is not treated as an overstayer for the purpose of immediate deportation or penalties for illegal stay, provided they depart within the designated timeframe. They may also be able to apply for a different status of residence during this period if eligible. However, if they fail to depart within the specified period, they will then become subject to deportation under Article 24, Item (7) of the Immigration Control Act (remaining in Japan over 60 days after revocation without obtaining permission).

The revocation of a status of residence is a serious measure that can disrupt lives and careers, and potentially lead to a bar on re-entry to Japan for a specified period if deportation follows.

Key Considerations to Avoid Revocation

To maintain a valid status of residence and avoid the risk of revocation, foreign nationals should:

• Ensure Absolute Honesty: Provide truthful and accurate information in all immigration applications, declarations, and interviews. Do not conceal material facts or submit documents you know or suspect to be false or misleading.
• Genuinely Engage in Permitted Activities: Actively pursue the studies, work, or family life for which your status was granted. If your primary activity ceases (e.g., you lose your job, drop out of school, or your marriage ends), consult with immigration authorities or a legal professional promptly about your options.
• Notify Authorities of Material Changes: Promptly inform the immigration authorities of significant changes in circumstances, such as a change of employer (if required by your visa type), marital status, or address, as per legal obligations.
• Understand "Justifiable Reasons": If unable to perform primary activities for a period (e.g., due to illness or temporary company shutdown), ensure this constitutes a "justifiable reason" and keep supporting documentation.
• Attend Opinion Hearings: If notified of a potential revocation and an opinion hearing, attend it (or ensure representation attends) and present your case with all relevant evidence. Ignoring such notices can lead to revocation by default.
• Maintain Proper Documentation: Keep records of employment, school attendance, marital status, financial transactions, and any correspondence with immigration authorities.

Conclusion

The power to revoke a status of residence under Article 22-4 of the Immigration Control Act serves as a critical enforcement tool for Japanese immigration authorities, ensuring that foreign nationals obtain and maintain their stay in Japan legitimately and in accordance with the intended purpose of their visa. As demonstrated by numerous court cases, actions involving deceit – such as providing false information about employment, marital status, or prior immigration history – are taken very seriously. Similarly, a prolonged failure to engage in the primary activities for which a status was granted, without a valid justification, can also trigger revocation. Understanding these grounds and the procedural requirement of an opinion hearing is essential for any foreign national residing in Japan to ensure compliance and safeguard their legal status.