Contents
On July 31, 2026, Japan’s Immigration Services Agency (ISA) published its latest set of examples of Special Permission to Land (上陸特別許可) — cases where a foreign national who was barred from entering Japan was permitted to land, and cases where they were not — covering 2025. It is the companion to the examples of Special Permission to Stay published on the same day, which concern people who are already in Japan. Here is what this document contains, what patterns we notice, and what the examples cannot tell us.
What is Special Permission to Land?
When a foreign national arrives in Japan, an immigration officer checks whether they meet the conditions for landing in Article 7 of the Immigration Control and Refugee Recognition Act (the Act). One of those conditions is that the person does not fall under a ground for denial of landing in Article 5. Examples of such grounds are having been deported from Japan before and having been sentenced to a term of imprisonment.
The ISA lists the main denial periods as follows: 5 years from the date of deportation, if the person had not previously been deported or left under a departure order; 10 years if they had; 1 year from the date of departure if the person left under a departure order; and no time limit for a person sentenced to imprisonment of 1 year or more under the laws of Japan or another country.
There are two routes to being allowed in despite a ground for denial. Special Permission to Land under Article 12 is a discretionary decision by the Minister of Justice, made case by case. The ISA says it weighs the purpose of entry, the details of the ground, how long ago the ground arose, the situation of the family living in Japan, and domestic and international circumstances. Under Article 5-2, the Minister can also decide not to deny landing on the basis of certain types of grounds alone, in cases provided for by ministerial ordinance, such as when a re-entry permit has been granted. As an example, the ISA explains that if a Certificate of Eligibility is issued to a person with a ground for denial and they obtain a valid visa at a Japanese embassy or consulate, they can be allowed to land without a separate special permission procedure, as long as nothing else stands in the way. The permitted examples in the 2025 document are labeled Article 5-2.
What the 2025 document contains
The 2025 edition lists 14 examples in two groups: (1) the person’s spouse is a Japanese national (8 examples), and (2) the spouse is a foreign national living in Japan lawfully (6 examples). In each group the ISA shows examples in which landing was permitted (7 in total) and examples in which it was not (7 in total). For each one it gives the ground and denial period, the time since deportation, the length of the marriage, whether the couple has children, any criminal penalty, and notes. For permitted examples it also gives the status of residence and period of stay: in all seven, one year, with the status Spouse or Child of Japanese National or Spouse or Child of Permanent Resident.
The ISA says the examples were selected from cases where the person does not meet the landing conditions because of a ground for denial and the spouse is a Japanese national or a lawfully resident foreign national. The document does not say how many applications there were overall, so it is illustrative, not statistical.
Patterns we noticed
The ISA does not draw conclusions from these examples. What follows are our own observations, and every case is decided on its own facts:
- Leaving Japan by yourself, at your own expense, stands out. In all seven permitted examples, the ISA notes that the person left Japan of their own accord at their own expense, and in three of them after being urged to do so by the authorities. Three of the seven not-permitted examples carry the opposite note: removal at government expense. The other four say nothing on the point. A previous deportation or departure order did not rule out permission either: three permitted examples had one, and in each the latest departure was at the person’s own expense.
- A denial period that has not expired is not necessarily a barrier, and a long gap does not guarantee permission. Both permitted examples with a 5-year denial period were still within it, at about 1 year 2 months and 2 years 10 months after deportation. By contrast, all three not-permitted examples with an indefinite denial period were 17 to 31 years after deportation, while the two permitted ones were about 2 and 5 years after. In those three cases, other factors, such as an unsuspended prison sentence or doubts about the marriage, seem to have counted for more than the passage of time.
- Criminal penalties matter, but a suspended sentence is not necessarily fatal. Neither of the two examples with an unsuspended prison sentence was permitted (theft and trespassing, 2 years 8 months; robbery causing injury, 5 years). The three permitted examples with a criminal penalty involved a fine or a suspended sentence, including two suspended sentences of 1 year 6 months. A suspended sentence was not enough on its own, though: three not-permitted examples also had one, and each carries a further note about removal at government expense, doubts about the marriage, or a previous deportation.
- The length of the marriage and the presence of a child did not settle the outcome. One permitted example involved a marriage of about 1 year 7 months, while a marriage of about 17 years 7 months was not permitted. In two of the four not-permitted examples with a Japanese spouse, the ISA notes doubts about the genuineness of the marriage, and in one of them also about its financial stability. A child of the couple appears on both sides, in two permitted and two not-permitted examples.
The examples at a glance
The tables below are our own English summary of the ISA’s Japanese-language document. A tilde (~) means “approximately,” and “since deportation” is the time elapsed since deportation as given by the ISA. We have combined the ISA’s separate permitted and not-permitted tables and grouped the examples by denial period, with permitted examples first in each group.
1. The spouse is a Japanese national
| Result | Case | Criminal penalty | Outcome and notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Permitted | Deportation (overstay): 5-year denial ~1 yr 2 mos since deportation; married ~1 yr 7 mos; no children | None | Spouse or Child of Japanese National, 1 year. Left Japan at own expense after being urged by the authorities. |
| Not permitted | Deportation (overstay): 5-year denial ~3 yrs 2 mos since deportation; married ~2 yrs 4 mos; no children | None | Removed at government expense. |
| Permitted | Deportation (illegal entry): 10-year denial ~7 yrs 3 mos since deportation; married ~2 yrs 10 mos; no children | None | Spouse or Child of Japanese National, 1 year. One earlier deportation; left Japan at own expense both times. |
| Permitted | Deportation (illegal entry): 10-year denial ~1 yr 1 mo since deportation; married ~12 yrs 9 mos; no children | Amusement Business Act violation: ¥500,000 fine | Spouse or Child of Japanese National, 1 year. One earlier deportation; at the latest one, left at own expense after being urged by the authorities. |
| Not permitted | Deportation (overstay): 10-year denial ~7 yrs 7 mos since deportation; married ~17 yrs 7 mos; no children | Immigration Control Act (overstay): 8 mos, suspended for 3 yrs | One earlier deportation; removed at government expense at the latest one. Genuineness of the marriage and its financial stability were in doubt. |
| Permitted | Imprisonment of 1 yr or more: indefinite denial ~2 yrs 5 mos since deportation; married ~1 yr 9 mos; no children | Immigration Control Act (overstay): 1 yr 6 mos, suspended for 3 yrs | Spouse or Child of Japanese National, 1 year. Left Japan at own expense. |
| Not permitted | Imprisonment of 1 yr or more: indefinite denial ~18 yrs 8 mos since deportation; married ~1 yr 2 mos; no children | Immigration Control Act (illegal entry): 1 yr 6 mos, suspended for 3 yrs | Genuineness of the marriage was in doubt. |
| Not permitted | Imprisonment of 1 yr or more: indefinite denial ~17 yrs 6 mos since deportation; married ~17 yrs 5 mos; with a child | Theft and trespassing: 2 yrs 8 mos, unsuspended | — |
2. The spouse is a foreign national living in Japan lawfully
| Result | Case | Criminal penalty | Outcome and notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Permitted | Deportation (overstay): 5-year denial ~2 yrs 10 mos since deportation; married ~1 yr 9 mos; with a child | None | Spouse or Child of Permanent Resident, 1 year. Left Japan at own expense. |
| Not permitted | Deportation (overstay): 5-year denial ~2 yrs 1 mo since deportation; married ~2 yrs 7 mos; no children | None | Removed at government expense. |
| Permitted | Deportation (overstay): 10-year denial ~1 yr 1 mo since deportation; married ~3 yrs; no children | None | Spouse or Child of Permanent Resident, 1 year. One earlier departure order; at the latest deportation, left at own expense after being urged by the authorities. |
| Not permitted | Deportation (overstay): 10-year denial ~7 yrs since deportation; married ~11 yrs 9 mos; no children | Professional negligence causing injury and Road Traffic Act violation: 10 mos, suspended for 3 yrs | One earlier deportation. |
| Permitted | Imprisonment of 1 yr or more: indefinite denial ~5 yrs 7 mos since deportation; married ~12 yrs 8 mos; with a child | False entry in an electronic notarial record and its use: 1 yr 6 mos, suspended for 3 yrs | Spouse or Child of Permanent Resident, 1 year. Left Japan at own expense. |
| Not permitted | Imprisonment of 1 yr or more: indefinite denial ~31 yrs 6 mos since deportation; married ~19 yrs 2 mos; with a child | Robbery causing injury: 5 yrs, unsuspended | — |
What this means for you
If you or your spouse are in this situation, a sensible first step is to identify which ground for denial applies and when the denial period ends. The examples suggest that timing alone matters less than you might expect: permission was given within a denial period, and it was not given long after one in cases with other concerns. What the examples do point to is how a person leaves Japan. If you are in the deportation process, it is worth getting advice before you leave, because leaving at your own expense appears to be taken into account. A convincing account of the marriage, including its genuineness and financial stability, is also part of the picture.
Separately, the ISA operates a system that can shorten the landing denial period for people who leave Japan voluntarily. Its report on the 2025 statistics records 348 such decisions during the year. The conditions are set out in the ISA’s Q&A on deportation procedures, and they are worth checking before you rely on it.
This article is general information based on public ISA documents. It is not legal advice on any individual case.
Sources (all in Japanese): ISA, “Publication of Cases Where Landing Was Specially Permitted and Not Permitted” (July 31, 2026), and its attached document (PDF); ISA, Immigration Control Act Violation Cases in 2025; ISA, Q&A on deportation procedures, departure orders and shortening of the landing denial period.