Help the Amine Family, an Iranian-Japanese family being evicted from their home by the Ministry of Justice

[See the comments that follow the article to learn how you can help this family! In actuality, the family is not Japanese in any sense other than that they *should* be granted citizenship. The oldest daughter basically grew up in Japan, and the youngest daughter was born and raised in Japan.]

From the Japan Times:

Article Title: Iranian teen can stay if family leaves quietly, Nagase hints

Article begins Justice Minister Jinen Nagase hinted Tuesday that the ministry might agree to a request from an Iranian family facing deportation that the 18-year-old daughter be allowed to stay if the family makes it clear the rest will leave Japan by the Friday deadline.

Comment: It sounds as if they were negotiating with the Corleone family as opposed to the Justice Ministry. What's that mean, leave quietly or else ...

The family, which has been here illegally since the early 1990s, had asked that the government allow the elder daughter to stay here to go to school in exchange for the rest of the family leaving the country.

Comment: Isn't it interesting how one of the daughter's was actually born here, over ten years ago, and yet she is here illegally? Let her stay, and let her parents stay.

Maryam Khalil has been accepted to a two-year program starting in April at a junior college in Gunma Prefecture.

"I'd like to pay as much consideration as possible to the elder daughter if the family reflects on their illegal stay in Japan and makes clear their will to voluntarily return home," Nagase told a regularly scheduled news conference.

Comment: Look, its about rights. The constitution is based on rights. Either these people have a right to be here or they don't. The fact is the government has allowed them to live here for all this time. The father had a gaijin card. He'd been running a used car business for years, and he only turned himself in because he wanted amnesty. So much for being honest.

Amine Khalil, 43, his wife and their two daughters have been ordered to leave Japan by Friday. Amine Khalil came to Japan in 1990, and his wife and Maryam joined him the following year. The other daughter was born in Japan in 1996. The family filed a suit with the Tokyo District Court in 2000 to fight the deportation order. The court repealed the order in 2003 but was overturned by the Tokyo High Court. The Supreme Court upheld the high court decision last Oct. 10. The family filed for special residence permits but was turned down.

Article Ends

Some more comments:

First, I want to note the following link: http://www.jca.apc.org/apfs/event/event20061127.htm

At that link, there is a good description of the events, and also a request to fax the Justice Department on behalf of the Amine family, and especially Maryam the oldest daughter. This request reads:

Japanese: どうか法務省へ「アミネさん一家に在留特別許可を認めてください。マリアムちゃんの夢をこわさないでください！」という内容のＦＡＸをお送りください。18歳の娘の人生を救うためにご協力ください！ （法務省ＦＡＸ番号：03-3592-7393）

English (my translation): Please fax the justice department. Include in your fax this message. "Please grant the Amine family permission to stay in Japan. Please don't destroy Maryam's dream!" Help save this young girls life!

Justice Department Fax: 03-3592-7393

This was prior to the recent decision of the Justice Ministry to give the family until January 8th (?). However, I doubt any harm can come from faxing the Justice department now.

Here are some key facts regarding this case (as best as I understand it):

1. Japan was granting amnesty to several immigrant families if it seemed that sending their children back would cause undue hardship on the children. In fact, Japan has an obligation to do this under certain UN treaties that they have signed. Of particular merit in this case is the youngest daughter, who was born in Japan and has now lived there over ten years.

2. At the encouragement of an organization in 1999, Mr. Khalil turned himself in and requested amnesty for his family. He noted that he had two daughters, one of them in the sixth grade and soon to be starting junior high school. He said it would present undue hardships for them if they had to readjust to Iran.

Mr. Khalil Amine could have continued on indefinitely without ever being "caught." The local city officials knew him, and as he ran a used car lot, he was well received in the community where he lived. He had an outstanding reputation. Note, he had an alien registration card. You can't get any more noticed than that.

At some point in the late 1990's he got involved with a Japanese NPO called Asian Peoples Friendship Society. The society had gathered about 50 people, and it was their goal to go as a group and petition the government for permission to stay. The society and its lawyers made clear this was a risky move, as all petitioners could be detained and then deported. The 50 members dwindled to 23 (five families and two individuals.)

While the 23 individuals could have probably continued on with their lives as they were, for various reasons they both wanted and thought they deserved legitimacy. They were making a political statement of sorts, and hoping by their actions they could help others in similar situations.

It is not clear to me how many were accepted. However, I am *guessing* that *all* got permission to stay in the country *except* the Amine family. See the document linked above and read it yourself. It doesn't seem clear to me on this point.

3. Mr. Khalil Amine was denied, arrested, and then the process began for his deportation. Or something along these lines, I'm not sure what the specific procedure was, but the Amine family was not given any type of amnesty. The result was that they were on the road to being deported. However, they were granted permission to stay *only* so as to appeal the decision of the government. (Often this isn't the case, so the lawyers must have been ready.)

4. A legal battle ensued, in which it was learned that there was a policy being put in practice but *never* made explicit, in which amnesty was being granted to families if they had a child that had been in Japan more than 10 years and was attending at least junior high school.

I am not clear if the government has *ever* specified its policies in regards to this. What the Asian Peoples Friendship Society did was to compare the Amine family situation with those who were accepted. They then guessed at what the criteria must have been.

For example the Amine family had an eleven year old daughter, so did another Iranian family that was granted permission. What was the difference? The Amines' daughter was in elementary school, the other family's daughter was in junior high school. Also, Mr. Amine had been in Japan nine years and a number of months, others accepted had been in Japan over 10 years.

5.The upshot here being that if Mr. Amine had waited only about six months more, he would have been granted amnesty. Yet, as the policy was a secret he had no way of knowing this.

6. After various court battles (and even the collection of 3000 signatures of support for Mr. Amine), the Supreme Court decided nearly eight years after Mr. Amine first requested amnesty, to send he and his family back to Iran. The Ministry of Justice with perhaps unintentional irony said something like, "the law's the law and we can't let people think it's okay to break it. That trumps human rights." Okay, they didn't really say that. But something like that. I really don't think I understand what the ministry's point was anyway. As the constitution is based on the concept of fundamental rights, and all laws follow from the constitution, it seems human rights should in fact take precedence, so the ministry's statement left me a little confused.

Summing up: My understanding is that the purpose of granting people the permission to stay has entirely to do with the daughters (the children). If they've become acclimatized to Japan then its regarded as cruel to force them to return to their home country. (In this case they'll have to cover up their skin, they won't be able to go out alone, they don't speak the country's language, they'll might have to practice a form of Islam disagreeable to them, etc)

It is also regarded an wrong to break up families in this way. (All of this is related to various UN treaties and so on.)

The question *was* this, should the family have been granted permission to stay? The Supreme Court seems to have said, the Ministry has jurisdiction, so their original decision should hold. (I'm not clear on what the Court stated. I think something like, it's not the responsibility of a court to legislate from the bench. The ministry's decision stands.)

Okay, fine. The original decision should hold. No problem.

Anyway, let's put that all behind us. How about *now*? Even if the family didn't meet the (mysterious) criteria six years ago, then *surely* they must meet it now?

It's as if the Justice Ministry wants to say, "no, because they only stayed in Japan so they could appeal their case. Now that the appeal is over they have to go."

This might sound plausible, but again, the issue is about the daughters, *not* the parents. It shouldn't matter why the parents stayed, the fact is they did, and now it will hurt the daughters to send them back. If other families have been allowed to stay for the sake of their children, why not the Amine Family?

Also, note that, at this point, there is no fear of precedence setting, because the precedence has *already* been set.

There's no clear barrier to granting the family permission to stay.

The Ministry of Justice could *easily* give the family permission to stay if it desired to. In fact, we can tell this by reading the article above. It's totally up to the Corleones ... ahem .. I mean the Justice Ministry to decide what to do here.

There's no clear logic behind the decision to send the family back. Some people have suggested political problems with Iran. Maybe that's it. But it's really disconcerting.

For reference see here.

Further comments from me were posted here.

[See the comments that follow the article to learn how you can help this family! In actuality, the family is not Japanese in any sense other than that they *should* be granted citizenship. The oldest daughter basically grew up in Japan, and the youngest daughter was born and raised in Japan.] From the Japan Times: Article Title: Iranian teen can stay if family leaves quietly, Nagase hints Article begins Justice Minister Jinen Nagase hinted Tuesday that the ministry might agree to a request from an Iranian family facing deportation that the 18-year-old daughter be allowed to stay if the family makes it clear the rest will leave Japan by the Friday deadline.

Comment: It sounds as if they were negotiating with the Corleone family as opposed to the Justice Ministry. What's that mean, leave quietly or else ...

The family, which has been here illegally since the early 1990s, had asked that the government allow the elder daughter to stay here to go to school in exchange for the rest of the family leaving the country.

Comment: Isn't it interesting how one of the daughter's was actually born here, over ten years ago, and yet she is here illegally? Let her stay, and let her parents stay.

Maryam Khalil has been accepted to a two-year program starting in April at a junior college in Gunma Prefecture. "I'd like to pay as much consideration as possible to the elder daughter if the family reflects on their illegal stay in Japan and makes clear their will to voluntarily return home," Nagase told a regularly scheduled news conference.

Comment: Look, its about rights. The constitution is based on rights. Either these people have a right to be here or they don't. The fact is the government has allowed them to live here for all this time. The father had a gaijin card. He'd been running a used car business for years, and he only turned himself in because he wanted amnesty. So much for being honest.

Amine Khalil, 43, his wife and their two daughters have been ordered to leave Japan by Friday. Amine Khalil came to Japan in 1990, and his wife and Maryam joined him the following year. The other daughter was born in Japan in 1996. The family filed a suit with the Tokyo District Court in 2000 to fight the deportation order. The court repealed the order in 2003 but was overturned by the Tokyo High Court. The Supreme Court upheld the high court decision last Oct. 10. The family filed for special residence permits but was turned down. Article Ends Some more comments: First, I want to note the following link: http://www.jca.apc.org/apfs/event/event20061127.htm At that link, there is a good description of the events, and also a request to fax the Justice Department on behalf of the Amine family, and especially Maryam the oldest daughter. This request reads: Japanese: どうか法務省へ「アミネさん一家に在留特別許可を認めてください。マリアムちゃんの夢をこわさないでください！」という内容のＦＡＸをお送りください。18歳の娘の人生を救うためにご協力ください！ （法務省ＦＡＸ番号：03-3592-7393） English (my translation): Please fax the justice department. Include in your fax this message. "Please grant the Amine family permission to stay in Japan. Please don't destroy Maryam's dream!" Help save this young girls life! Justice Department Fax: 03-3592-7393 This was prior to the recent decision of the Justice Ministry to give the family until January 8th (?). However, I doubt any harm can come from faxing the Justice department now. Here are some key facts regarding this case (as best as I understand it): 1. Japan was granting amnesty to several immigrant families if it seemed that sending their children back would cause undue hardship on the children. In fact, Japan has an obligation to do this under certain UN treaties that they have signed. Of particular merit in this case is the youngest daughter, who was born in Japan and has now lived there over ten years. 2. At the encouragement of an organization in 1999, Mr. Khalil turned himself in and requested amnesty for his family. He noted that he had two daughters, one of them in the sixth grade and soon to be starting junior high school. He said it would present undue hardships for them if they had to readjust to Iran. Mr. Khalil Amine could have continued on indefinitely without ever being "caught." The local city officials knew him, and as he ran a used car lot, he was well received in the community where he lived. He had an outstanding reputation. Note, he had an alien registration card. You can't get any more noticed than that. At some point in the late 1990's he got involved with a Japanese NPO called Asian Peoples Friendship Society. The society had gathered about 50 people, and it was their goal to go as a group and petition the government for permission to stay. The society and its lawyers made clear this was a risky move, as all petitioners could be detained and then deported. The 50 members dwindled to 23 (five families and two individuals.) While the 23 individuals could have probably continued on with their lives as they were, for various reasons they both wanted and thought they deserved legitimacy. They were making a political statement of sorts, and hoping by their actions they could help others in similar situations. It is not clear to me how many were accepted. However, I am *guessing* that *all* got permission to stay in the country *except* the Amine family. See the document linked above and read it yourself. It doesn't seem clear to me on this point. 3. Mr. Khalil Amine was denied, arrested, and then the process began for his deportation. Or something along these lines, I'm not sure what the specific procedure was, but the Amine family was not given any type of amnesty. The result was that they were on the road to being deported. However, they were granted permission to stay *only* so as to appeal the decision of the government. (Often this isn't the case, so the lawyers must have been ready.) 4. A legal battle ensued, in which it was learned that there was a policy being put in practice but *never* made explicit, in which amnesty was being granted to families if they had a child that had been in Japan more than 10 years and was attending at least junior high school. I am not clear if the government has *ever* specified its policies in regards to this. What the Asian Peoples Friendship Society did was to compare the Amine family situation with those who were accepted. They then guessed at what the criteria must have been. For example the Amine family had an eleven year old daughter, so did another Iranian family that was granted permission. What was the difference? The Amines' daughter was in elementary school, the other family's daughter was in junior high school. Also, Mr. Amine had been in Japan nine years and a number of months, others accepted had been in Japan over 10 years. 5.The upshot here being that if Mr. Amine had waited only about six months more, he would have been granted amnesty. Yet, as the policy was a secret he had no way of knowing this. 6. After various court battles (and even the collection of 3000 signatures of support for Mr. Amine), the Supreme Court decided nearly eight years after Mr. Amine first requested amnesty, to send he and his family back to Iran. The Ministry of Justice with perhaps unintentional irony said something like, "the law's the law and we can't let people think it's okay to break it. That trumps human rights." Okay, they didn't really say that. But something like that. I really don't think I understand what the ministry's point was anyway. As the constitution is based on the concept of fundamental rights, and all laws follow from the constitution, it seems human rights should in fact take precedence, so the ministry's statement left me a little confused. Summing up: My understanding is that the purpose of granting people the permission to stay has entirely to do with the daughters (the children). If they've become acclimatized to Japan then its regarded as cruel to force them to return to their home country. (In this case they'll have to cover up their skin, they won't be able to go out alone, they don't speak the country's language, they'll might have to practice a form of Islam disagreeable to them, etc) It is also regarded an wrong to break up families in this way. (All of this is related to various UN treaties and so on.) The question *was* this, should the family have been granted permission to stay? The Supreme Court seems to have said, the Ministry has jurisdiction, so their original decision should hold. (I'm not clear on what the Court stated. I think something like, it's not the responsibility of a court to legislate from the bench. The ministry's decision stands.) Okay, fine. The original decision should hold. No problem. Anyway, let's put that all behind us. How about *now*? Even if the family didn't meet the (mysterious) criteria six years ago, then *surely* they must meet it now? It's as if the Justice Ministry wants to say, "no, because they only stayed in Japan so they could appeal their case. Now that the appeal is over they have to go." This might sound plausible, but again, the issue is about the daughters, *not* the parents. It shouldn't matter why the parents stayed, the fact is they did, and now it will hurt the daughters to send them back. If other families have been allowed to stay for the sake of their children, why not the Amine Family? Also, note that, at this point, there is no fear of precedence setting, because the precedence has *already* been set. There's no clear barrier to granting the family permission to stay. The Ministry of Justice could *easily* give the family permission to stay if it desired to. In fact, we can tell this by reading the article above. It's totally up to the Corleones ... ahem .. I mean the Justice Ministry to decide what to do here. There's no clear logic behind the decision to send the family back. Some people have suggested political problems with Iran. Maybe that's it. But it's really disconcerting. For reference see here. Further comments from me were posted here.