“Abandoned if unable to work? Judicial decision to ‘guarantee the right to live’ to the rapidly increasing number of foreign residents as members of society who support society through work” (2024/01/15 Tokyo Shimbun, Japanese Only) It seems that a high court judgment should have been issued yesterday in a lawsuit in Chiba Prefecture, regarding Ghanaian plaintiff’s application to cancel the rejection of livelihood protection and start.
About the issue of providing the protection to foreigners, in 2010, a group of foreigners with Chinese nationality who had recently entered the country applied for welfare to Osaka Prefecture, which brought into question.
<Standing point of the government>
Regarding the granting of the protection to foreigners, local governments continue to operate in favor of granting, according to a notification from the Ministry of Health and Welfare in 1950, subject to certain conditions.
Employment-related residence statuses are not eligible for the protection because the purpose of entering the country is to earn income, but “permanent resident,” “spouse of Japanese national,” “spouse of permanent resident, etc.,” “long-term resident,” and “Special Permanent Resident” may be eligible. (including foreigners who have been recognized as refugees.)
This article is about the pros and cons of granting protection, but this is also an issue in the area of immigration law, such as extension of period of stay and change of status of residence. (Excluding permanent residents and special permanent residents who have no limit in period of stay)
In other words, in order to obtain any type of permit, it is necessary to have sufficient assets or skills to earn an independent living. (Immigration Agency guidelines)
<Reality>
However, even if he/she is receiving welfare, permission may be granted from a humanitarian standpoint when applying for a change of residence status or extension of your period of stay. (※)
(*) In practice, special circumstances are recognized for those who have already received permission to extend their period of stay at least once based on their current resident status, and for those who are staying in Japan for the purpose of taking care of and raising a biological child of a Japanese national. As such, there is a high possibility that permission will not be denied solely based on the fact that he/she are receiving welfare benefits.” (Koji Yamawaki [New Edition] Immigration Law Practice Shin Nihon Hoki P112)