Urmas Teder, Journalist
Japan often presents itself as a country committed to administrative transparency and evidence-based policymaking. Public consultations are one of the mechanisms through which the government seeks to reinforce that image, allowing citizens and stakeholders to comment on proposed regulations before they are adopted. Yet the latest revision of immigration-related fees raises an uncomfortable question: how meaningful is a consultation if many of those most directly affected cannot realistically participate?
The Ministry of Justice has opened a public comment period on a proposal that would substantially increase a range of immigration-related administrative fees. The most striking measure would raise the cost of applying for permanent residency from ¥10,000 to ¥200,000, while several residence renewals and changes of status could reach ¥75,000. For a country that increasingly relies on foreign workers to address labour shortages and demographic decline, the scale of the proposed increases is already likely to generate debate.
The controversy, however, extends beyond the fees themselves. The consultation only accepts submissions in Japanese, with the government arguing that translations may fail to convey the author’s intended meaning accurately. While this concern is understandable from a legal drafting perspective, it overlooks a practical reality: the individuals who will bear the financial impact of these measures are, in many cases, precisely those least able to express themselves in Japanese at the level required for a formal government consultation.
This is not the first time the issue has been raised. During parliamentary discussions, opposition lawmakers called for multilingual submissions to ensure broader participation, particularly from foreign residents. The proposal was ultimately rejected, leaving the consultation process formally open but functionally inaccessible for a significant portion of its intended audience. The result is a paradox in which the government seeks public input while excluding many of the people whose experiences could provide the most valuable feedback.
The timing is particularly noteworthy. Japan has spent the past decade gradually expanding pathways for foreign workers and encouraging greater internationalisation as a response to an ageing population and a shrinking workforce. Policymakers frequently emphasise the importance of creating an environment in which overseas talent feels welcome and can build long-term lives in the country. Policies that affect this community should therefore not only be transparent but also accessible to those expected to comply with them.
Consultation is most valuable when it reflects the diversity of those impacted by public policy. Language should not become an unintended filter that limits participation in decisions with significant consequences for foreign residents. Whether or not the proposed fee increases are ultimately justified, the process surrounding them highlights a broader governance challenge. As Japan becomes increasingly dependent on international talent, ensuring that those residents have a genuine opportunity to be heard will be as important as the policies themselves.
