*Translated by Google translate

<Judgment Report>

On June 17, 2025, a partial victory judgment was delivered. A summary has been uploaded to the "Progress" page—please take a look.

 <Thank you for your support>

 In regards to the lawsuit "Japan's immigration detention violates international human rights law," which began in January 2022, we have received many people's support, donations, and messages of support. All of these have supported us, and we would like to express our sincere gratitude to everyone. Thanks to you, we received a donation of 2 million yen, which was the next step, and we have been able to use it for researchers' opinions, research activities, interpretation, etc. On the hearing date of October 29, 2024, the plaintiffs Deniz and Safari will have their personal examinations completed, and the case is finally reaching its climax.

 We would like to continue working with you on the trial, and we appreciate your continued support.

 What was the incident like?

 The current lawsuit seeks confirmation that the immigration detention of the plaintiffs, Safari and Deniz, constituted "arbitrary detention" prohibited by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and was therefore illegal, and seeks compensation for damages from the country that carried out the illegal detention.

 Safari, originally from Iran, and Deniz, a Kurdish man from Turkey, were not recognized as refugees despite their applications, and still do not have residence status. Immigration Bureau used this reason to detain the two, and since 2016, they have been living a life deprived of their freedom for over three and a half years.

 Deniz was detained by immigration authorities from May 2016 , and Safaree was detained from June 2016.
 Hunger strike in June 2019
 July 2019: Repeated two-week provisional releases
 In October 2019, the two men reported the matter to the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention. (Denis has been on provisional release since March 2020, and Safari has been on provisional release since April 2020.)
 In September 2020, the Working Group announced that the case constituted "arbitrary detention in violation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and other international treaties."
 January 2022: Lawsuit filed against Japan claiming that its immigration system violates international human rights standards

 Since 2016, the two have been detained indefinitely by the Immigration Bureau. As a result, they are no longer free to do normal things such as meet with family and friends, go out, eat meals together, or use the phone or the internet. Furthermore, because there is no limit on the detention period, they spent their days in agony, anxiety and despair, as if they were in a tunnel with no exit, not knowing how long they would be detained for.

 There is a system in place for those detained by immigration bureaus that allows them to be released by paying a deposit called "provisional release." After their detention, the two applied for provisional release many times, but their applications were denied.

 In June 2019, a Nigerian man died of starvation at the Omura Immigration Center, sparking hunger strikes and fasting in immigration detention facilities. The two men were driven to the brink by the harsh detention and decided to fast. However, the Immigration Bureau began granting provisional release to some of the detainees who had fasted, including the two men, for a short period of around two weeks, as if to make an example of others, and then detaining them again after two weeks. The fear that they would finally be able to get out was so short-lived that in two weeks they would be returned to detention with no way out again deeply traumatized the two men. Even now, while on provisional release, they are suffering from the psychological aftereffects of detention.

 The couple decided to seek help from the international community about these inhumane acts by immigration authorities, and reported the matter to the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention in October 2019. As a result, the Working Group issued an opinion in response to their report stating that "the detention of the two individuals constitutes arbitrary detention and violates the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, etc."

 By filing a lawsuit in a Japanese court, the two men hope to have their immigration detention confirmed as illegal and amounting to "arbitrary detention" prohibited by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, as pointed out by the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, and to seek compensation from the country that carried out the illegal detention, thereby seeking change in the way immigration detention is carried out in Japan. 

 Where is the problem?

 1. The problem of arbitrary and indefinite detention  

 The problem lies in the fact that the plaintiffs, Safari and Deniz, were subjected to "arbitrary detention" that was not necessary, reasonable or proportional.

 Freedom is a principle and a right for all people. In particular, freedom from physical restraint is one of the most important rights for human life, and if this right is arbitrarily and indefinitely taken away, people will be forced to endure terrible pain and despair, just as Safari and Deniz suffered. It is wrong to detain people for years simply because they have foreign nationality and no resident status.

 Article 9, paragraph 1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which Japan ratified (agreeing to be bound by the treaty) in 1979, states that "Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest or detention," and prohibits "arbitrary detention" that lacks necessity, reasonableness, and proportionality.

 The two plaintiffs are in the process of applying for refugee status and are not at risk of fleeing or hiding.

 Deniz married a Japanese woman and has been with her for over 10 years, through thick and thin. His wife has always been by his side, no matter how long he has been held captive.

 Safari, who is fluent in Japanese and kind-hearted, has many Japanese friends, all of whom look forward to the day when he can live in Japan with peace of mind. We are claiming that the immigration detention of these two people as described above constitutes "arbitrary detention" that is not necessary, reasonable, or proportional, and therefore violates the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

 2. Immigration law and its implementation  

 Because the Immigration Act does not stipulate the requirements for detention, the maximum period of detention, or the procedures for judicial review, the practice of allowing immigration bureaus to detain people according to their own policies is problematic as it can lead to unnecessary detention and prolonged detention periods.

 The current Immigration Control and Refugee Recognition Act (Immigration Act) stipulates that after a deportation order (an order for forced deportation) is issued to a foreign national who does not have a status of residence, they may detain him/her "until the time of deportation is possible" (Article 52, Paragraph 5). Therefore, immigration authorities are detaining foreign nationals in immigration detention facilities indefinitely without going through a court decision.

 Detained people can live outside if they are granted "provisional release," but following a notice issued by the Director-General of the Immigration Bureau of the Ministry of Justice in 2018, a new practice was introduced in which detention would not be granted for provisional release unless the detainee was injured or ill and could not endure detention, lengthening the overall detention period. As mentioned above, the reason why provisional release and detention were used as an example against people who went on hunger strikes is because the Immigration Bureau has broad discretion in granting provisional release and detention, as there are no provisions in the Immigration Control Act regarding the requirements for detention.

 3. Response to the opinion of the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention  

 As mentioned above, the Immigration Control Act does not provide for judicial review of immigration detention, so immigration bureaus have continued to detain them at their broad discretion. As there are limited ways to challenge the detention, the two plaintiffs sought help from the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, which was granted. However, even after the Working Group issued its opinion that the immigration detention of the two men violated the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the government has refused to acknowledge responsibility or provide compensation. 

 How the plaintiffs came to power

 Even today, Safari and Deniz are still living on provisional release and enduring the physical and mental pain they suffered during their long-term detention while waiting to be recognized as refugees. The government has not apologized to the victims of detention that the UN has deemed illegal, and has refused to provide any compensation or cover the medical costs for the physical and mental injuries they suffered during their detention.

 Even today, like these two, there are people who are suffering in long-term detention, and those who continue to suffer the nightmares and scars of long-term detention while on provisional release. Taking action against the immigration bureau takes courage. However, Safari and Deniz decided to stand up not only for themselves, but for the many oppressed people out there, and filed this lawsuit.

 What we want to achieve through this lawsuit

 The United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention has already issued an opinion that "the immigration detention of Safari and Deniz violates the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights."

 The fact that immigration authorities have continued to detain people arbitrarily, without necessity, rationality or proportionality, simply because they lack a resident status is also a problem for us living in Japan. By having a Japanese court confirm that Japan's immigration detention violates the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, we hope to appeal to society more broadly that immigration law and the operation of immigration detention must be changed.

 At the same time, I would like the government to do the obvious thing, which is to provide compensation to those who were detained for long periods and suffered physical and mental harm.

 Use of funds

 Stamps and postage for filing lawsuits, expenses for researchers and experts preparing written opinions, transportation, communication, copying, etc., interpretation and translation expenses
Venue rental fee *If there is any money left over after accounting for the above expenses, we would like to use it for attorney's fees.
 *We achieved our first goal of 1 million yen in August 2023. In order to further enhance our litigation activities, we are aiming for 2 million yen as the next step. We appreciate your cooperation.

 Message from the lawyer in charge

 The issue of long-term immigration detention has always been serious, but the two-week provisional release and re-detention following widespread hunger strikes and starvation in immigration detention facilities in 2019 was extremely inhumane and unforgivable. This prompted me to report the matter to the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, but I also decided to directly question the more fundamental issue of unconditional, indefinite, and non-judicial detention.

 In this lawsuit, the legal basis is being based on international human rights treaties, including Article 9, paragraph 1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (prohibition of arbitrary detention) and Article 9, paragraph 4 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (right to judicial review of detention).

 Unfortunately, international human rights treaties have not been widely adopted in Japan, and the government has ignored recommendations made in UN treaty-based reviews. The issue of immigration detention has also been pointed out as problematic by the Human Rights Committee, the Committee against Torture, and the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, but the Japanese government has not listened at all.

 By making it clear in a Japanese court that Japan's immigration detention violates international human rights treaties, we hope to ensure that the Japanese government respects the advice of UN agencies and deals with various human rights issues in line with international human rights treaties, including immigration detention.

 Introduction of the lawyer in charge 

 ▲The lawyer and the plaintiffs, Deniz and Safari

 Tomoko Urashiro, Tokyo Bar Association, Shinwa Law Office Ryutaro Ogawa, Tokyo Bar Association, Tokyo Joint Law Office Tomokazu Komai, Tokyo Bar Association, Milestone General Law Office Masako Suzuki, Tokyo Bar Association, Izumibashi Law Office Shota Okamoto, Tokyo Bar Association, Shoei Law Office Shunsuke Takada, Second Tokyo Bar Association, Asahi Law Office

 We are engaged in human rights issues of foreign nationals, including refugee cases. Based on the belief that human rights know no borders, we would like to apply international human rights treaties in Japanese court cases.

 The issue of immigration detention has become a hot topic in society in recent years. We would appreciate your support for this lawsuit, which directly questions whether immigration detention is a violation of international human rights treaties.