Administrative Complaint Review Act

• A request for review of a disposition cannot be filed once three months have passed from the day after the person learned of the disposition — one month from the day after they learned of the decision, if they asked for re-investigation first — or once one year has passed from the day after the disposition (or that decision) was made, unless there are legitimate grounds (正当な理由). Days a written request spends in the post or with a licensed correspondence-delivery business are not counted.(Art. 18(1), Art. 18(2), Art. 18(3)) (the provisions it rests on)
• Where review lies with an agency other than the one that decided and an Act (法律) provides for it, a dissatisfied person may instead ask the deciding agency to re-investigate (再調査の請求), unless they have already requested review of the disposition. The request for re-investigation cannot be filed once three months have passed from the day after learning of the disposition, or one year from the day after it was made, unless there are legitimate grounds.(Art. 5(1), Art. 54(1), Art. 54(2)) (the provisions it rests on)
• A person who has asked for re-investigation may request review only after it is decided, unless three months pass from the day after filing (or after correcting a defect they were told to correct) without a decision — the agency must then tell them in writing without delay that they may request review at once — or there are legitimate grounds for not waiting. Requesting review early in this way counts as withdrawing the re-investigation; but where the deciding agency had by then already sent out a decision revoking the disposition, or undone the act, it is the request for review that counts as withdrawn, so far as that revocation goes.(Art. 5(2), Art. 5(2)(i), Art. 5(2)(ii), Art. 57(1), Art. 56(1)) (the provisions it rests on)
• Where an Act (法律) provides for it, a person dissatisfied with the determination on a request for review may file a request for re-examination (再審査請求) with the agency that Act names, against that determination or against the disposition itself. It cannot be filed once one month has passed from the day after learning of the determination, or one year from the day after it was made, unless there are legitimate grounds.(Art. 6(1), Art. 6(2), Art. 62(1), Art. 62(2)) (the provisions it rests on)
• Requesting review does not stop the disposition taking effect, being carried out, or its procedure going on. The reviewing agency may stay them in full or in part (執行停止) on the requester's petition — or on its own initiative where it is the deciding agency or the one above it — while a reviewing agency that is neither may do so only on petition, after hearing the deciding agency. On a petition it must grant a stay where one is urgently needed to avoid serious damage, unless the stay may seriously affect public welfare or the request appears to have no merit.(Art. 25(1), Art. 25(2), Art. 25(3), Art. 25(4)) (the provisions it rests on)
• Under the Administrative Case Litigation Act (行政事件訴訟法), a separate Act, a person may sue in court at once to have a disposition revoked even where a request for review is open to them, unless an Act (法律) provides that such a suit may be brought only after a determination on the request for review. Even then they may sue without the determination if three months pass from the request without one, if that is urgently needed to avoid serious damage from the disposition, its enforcement or the procedure going on, or if there are other legitimate grounds.(Administrative Case Litigation Act Art. 8(1), Administrative Case Litigation Act Art. 8(2), Administrative Case Litigation Act Art. 8(2)(i), Administrative Case Litigation Act Art. 8(2)(ii), Administrative Case Litigation Act Art. 8(2)(iii)) (the provisions it rests on)

• 24 June 2026

  The text on this site

  Act on the Arrangement of Related Acts upon the Enforcement of the Act Partially Amending the Civil Code, etc.

  民法等の一部を改正する法律の施行に伴う関係法律の整備等に関する法律

  Act No. 46 of 2026The text after this amendment, on e-Gov

• 21 May 2026

  Act Partially Amending the Basic Act on the Formation of a Digital Society, etc. to Promote Regulatory Reform for the Formation of a Digital Society

  デジタル社会の形成を図るための規制改革を推進するためのデジタル社会形成基本法等の一部を改正する法律

  Act No. 63 of 2023The text after this amendment, on e-Gov

• 1 June 2025

  Act on the Arrangement of Related Acts upon the Enforcement of the Act Partially Amending the Penal Code, etc.

  刑法等の一部を改正する法律の施行に伴う関係法律の整理等に関する法律

  Act No. 68 of 2022The text after this amendment, on e-Gov

• 1 April 2024

  Act Partially Amending the Basic Act on the Formation of a Digital Society, etc. to Promote Regulatory Reform for the Formation of a Digital Society

  デジタル社会の形成を図るための規制改革を推進するためのデジタル社会形成基本法等の一部を改正する法律

  Act No. 63 of 2023The text after this amendment, on e-Gov

• 1 April 2024

  Act on Support for Women Facing Difficult Problems

  困難な問題を抱える女性への支援に関する法律

  Act No. 52 of 2022The text after this amendment, on e-Gov

• 16 June 2023

  Act Partially Amending the Basic Act on the Formation of a Digital Society, etc. to Promote Regulatory Reform for the Formation of a Digital Society

  デジタル社会の形成を図るための規制改革を推進するためのデジタル社会形成基本法等の一部を改正する法律

  Act No. 63 of 2023The text after this amendment, on e-Gov

• 17 June 2022

  Act on the Arrangement of Related Acts upon the Enforcement of the Act Partially Amending the Penal Code, etc.

  刑法等の一部を改正する法律の施行に伴う関係法律の整理等に関する法律

  Act No. 68 of 2022The text after this amendment, on e-Gov

• 25 May 2022

  Act on Support for Women Facing Difficult Problems

  困難な問題を抱える女性への支援に関する法律

  Act No. 52 of 2022The text after this amendment, on e-Gov

• 1 September 2021

  Act on the Arrangement of Related Acts for the Formation of a Digital Society

  デジタル社会の形成を図るための関係法律の整備に関する法律

  Act No. 37 of 2021The text after this amendment, on e-Gov

• 19 May 2021

  Act on the Arrangement of Related Acts for the Formation of a Digital Society

  デジタル社会の形成を図るための関係法律の整備に関する法律

  Act No. 37 of 2021The text after this amendment, on e-Gov

All 12 amendments already in force

• This Act governs complaints about dispositions except where another Act (法律) makes special provision. Several of its rules — which agency hears a request, and whether one may be made orally — also give way to another Act, or, for a disposition under a local ordinance (条例), to that ordinance.(Art. 1(2), Art. 4(1), Art. 19(1)) (the provisions it rests on)
• For dispositions under the national tax Acts, the National Tax General Rules Act (国税通則法) sets the route: for one made by a district director (税務署長), a regional commissioner (国税局長) or a director-general of a customs house (税関長), the person chooses between a request for re-investigation to that official and a request for review to the President of the National Tax Tribunal (国税不服審判所長), and may still go to the President after a re-investigation decision, while one made by the Commissioner of the National Tax Agency (国税庁長官) goes to a request for review to the Commissioner. A district director's disposition notified as investigated by regional taxation bureau staff, or by National Tax Agency staff, is treated as made by the regional commissioner, or by the Commissioner. This Act's Chapters 2 and 3, its procedure for review and re-investigation, do not apply to these complaints, and the rest of it applies except where a national tax Act provides otherwise; but a request for review to the Commissioner follows this Act, Chapters 2 and 3 included, except where a national tax Act provides otherwise, and complaints about licences under Chapter 2 of the Liquor Tax Act (酒税法) follow this Act in place of that section of the National Tax General Rules Act.(Act on General Rules for National Taxes Art. 75(1), Act on General Rules for National Taxes Art. 75(1)(i), Act on General Rules for National Taxes Art. 75(1)(ii), Act on General Rules for National Taxes Art. 75(2), Act on General Rules for National Taxes Art. 75(3), Act on General Rules for National Taxes Art. 80(1), Act on General Rules for National Taxes Art. 80(2), Act on General Rules for National Taxes Art. 80(3)) (the provisions it rests on)
• Under the Immigration Control and Refugee Recognition Act (出入国管理及び難民認定法), a request for review of a refusal to recognize a person as a refugee, or as eligible for complementary protection (補完的保護対象者) where they were not recognized as a refugee, of the withdrawal of either recognition, or of a failure to act on an application for it, is filed in writing with the Minister of Justice. In place of the three months of Article 18(1), a request about a refusal or withdrawal must be filed within seven days from the day the person received notice of it. The Minister must hear refugee examination counsellors (難民審査参与員), who take the review officer's place, and the Administrative Complaint Review Board is not consulted.(Immigration Control and Refugee Recognition Act Art. 61-2-12(1), Immigration Control and Refugee Recognition Act Art. 61-2-12(2), Immigration Control and Refugee Recognition Act Art. 61-2-12(3), Immigration Control and Refugee Recognition Act Art. 61-2-12(5), Immigration Control and Refugee Recognition Act Art. 61-2-12(6)) (the provisions it rests on)
• Where the reviewing agency is one of the commissions, councils or similar bodies listed in Article 9(1) — a commission (委員会) of the national government or of a local government, for instance — or a local ordinance (条例) so provides for a disposition under it, no review officer is named. The agency runs the proceedings itself, with the wording changes in Appended Table 1, and Articles 17, 40, 42 and 50(2) do not apply.(Art. 9(1), Art. 9(1)(i), Art. 9(1)(ii), Art. 9(1)(iii), Art. 9(3), Appended Table 1) (the provisions it rests on)
• Complaints about a disposition made, or about inaction on an application filed, before this Act came into force follow the earlier rules (なお従前の例による): those of the former Administrative Complaint Review Act (Act No. 160 of 1962), which this Act replaced in full.(Suppl. Prov. Art. 3(1), Enacting Stmt. 1) (the provisions it rests on)

• Unless an Act (法律) — or, for a disposition under a local ordinance (条例), that ordinance — provides otherwise, a request for review goes to the deciding (or non-acting) agency itself where it has no agency above it or is itself the minister in charge (主任の大臣), the Grand Steward of the Imperial Household Agency (宮内庁長官) or the head of an agency (庁). Otherwise it goes to the Grand Steward or the head of an agency where one is above it; failing that, to the minister in charge where one is above it; and failing both, to the highest administrative agency above it.(Art. 4(1), Art. 4(1)(i), Art. 4(1)(ii), Art. 4(1)(iii), Art. 4(1)(iv)) (the provisions it rests on)
• A request is made by submitting a written request for review (審査請求書) stating, among other things, for a disposition, the disposition, the day the requester learned of it, and the purpose of and grounds for the request, and for inaction (不作為), what was applied for and when, unless another Act (法律) — or, for a disposition under a local ordinance (条例), that ordinance — allows it orally. Where review lies with an agency other than the deciding one, it may be handed to the deciding agency, and for the time limit it counts as filed when it is handed there. The requester may withdraw it in writing at any time before the determination.(Art. 19(1), Art. 19(2), Art. 19(3), Art. 21(1), Art. 21(3), Art. 27(1), Art. 27(2)) (the provisions it rests on)
• An agency making a disposition that can be challenged must tell the person it is addressed to, in writing, that they may complain, to which agency, and within what period, unless the disposition is made orally; an interested person who asks must be told too, in writing if they ask for that. If it gives no such notice, the person may hand a written complaint to the agency that decided, and it is treated as filed with the right agency from the start. A written request sent to the wrong agency because the agency gave the wrong notice is passed on, and also treated as filed correctly from the start.(Art. 82(1), Art. 82(2), Art. 82(3), Art. 83(1), Art. 83(3), Art. 83(4), Art. 83(5), Art. 22(1), Art. 22(5)) (the provisions it rests on)
• Where a written request does not meet the requirements of Article 19, the reviewing agency must order it corrected within a reasonable period it sets. If it is not corrected in time, or the request is plainly unlawful and cannot be corrected, the agency may dismiss it by a determination without naming a review officer or holding the review proceedings.(Art. 23(1), Art. 24(1), Art. 24(2), Art. 9(1)) (the provisions it rests on)
• The agency the request is filed with (the reviewing agency, 審査庁) names one of its staff — from its list of candidates, where it has made one — as review officer (審理員) to run the proceedings, and tells the requester and the deciding agency. The review officer may not be someone involved in the disposition under review or in the re-investigation decision on it, the requester, the requester's spouse, a relative within the fourth degree or a relative living with them, their agent, anyone who used to be one of those, a guardian or similar supporter of theirs, or an interested person in the case.(Art. 9(1), Art. 9(2), Art. 11(2), Art. 17(1)) (the provisions it rests on)
• The deciding agency answers the request in a written explanation (弁明書), which the requester may answer with a written counterargument (反論書), and both sides may submit evidence. On petition, the review officer must give the requester or an intervenor a chance to state their views orally, with all parties called, unless that is found difficult because of where they are or other circumstances; there, with the officer's permission, they may question the deciding agency. Until the proceedings close they may inspect, or for a fee get copies of, the evidence and other documents submitted, which the officer may refuse only where a third party's interests could be harmed or there are other legitimate grounds.(Art. 29(2), Art. 29(5), Art. 30(1), Art. 32(1), Art. 32(2), Art. 31(1), Art. 31(2), Art. 31(5), Art. 38(1), Art. 38(4)) (the provisions it rests on)
• The review officer closes the proceedings once the necessary proceedings are done. The officer may also close them early where a written explanation, counterargument, opinion, evidence or other document asked for is not submitted in time and still not after a further period is set, or where the person who asked to state their views orally fails to appear without legitimate grounds. On closing, the officer writes an opinion on the determination and hands it to the reviewing agency with the case record.(Art. 41(1), Art. 41(2), Art. 41(2)(i), Art. 41(2)(ii), Art. 42(1), Art. 42(2)) (the provisions it rests on)
• A reviewing agency that is the minister in charge, the Grand Steward or the head of an agency (庁) must then consult the Administrative Complaint Review Board (行政不服審査会) in the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, and the head of a local government (地方公共団体) the body that local government sets up. This is not needed in some cases, among them where the requester has said they do not want it (unless an intervenor objects), where the request is to be dismissed as unlawful, or where the agency is to revoke in full a disposition other than a refusal of an application, or to grant an application in full, and no one has opposed that in a written opinion or at the oral hearing.(Art. 43(1), Art. 43(1)(iv), Art. 43(1)(vi), Art. 43(1)(vii), Art. 43(1)(viii), Art. 67(1), Art. 81(1)) (the provisions it rests on)
• The reviewing agency dismisses (却下) a request filed out of time or otherwise unlawful — for inaction, also one made before a reasonable period had passed — and rejects (棄却) one without grounds. Where a request about a disposition has grounds, it revokes the disposition in whole or in part — or, for a de facto act (事実上の行為), declares the act unlawful or unjust and orders it abolished or changed, or abolishes or changes it itself; only a reviewing agency that is the deciding agency or the one above it may instead change it, and never to the requester's disadvantage. Even a request with grounds may be rejected where revoking the disposition, or abolishing the de facto act, would seriously harm the public interest and the agency, weighing the requester's damage, how it can be compensated or prevented and every other circumstance, finds doing so not in keeping with public welfare; the determination must then declare the disposition unlawful or unjust.(Art. 45(1), Art. 45(2), Art. 45(3), Art. 46(1), Art. 47(1), Art. 47(1)(i), Art. 47(1)(ii), Art. 48(1), Art. 49(1), Art. 49(2)) (the provisions it rests on)
• Where it revokes a refusal of an application and finds a particular disposition should be made, a reviewing agency above the deciding agency orders that agency to make it, and a reviewing agency that is the deciding agency makes it. Where a request about inaction has grounds, the reviewing agency declares the inaction unlawful or unjust, and in the same way orders or makes the disposition it finds should be made.(Art. 46(2), Art. 46(2)(i), Art. 46(2)(ii), Art. 49(3), Art. 49(3)(i), Art. 49(3)(ii)) (the provisions it rests on)
• The determination (裁決) is a written document giving its reasons, including why it departs from the review officer's opinion or the Board's report where it does. It takes effect when served on the requester — and, where someone other than the person the disposition was addressed to requested review and the determination revokes or changes the disposition, when served on that person too — and it binds the agencies concerned. Where it revokes a disposition made on an application because of a flaw in procedure, or revokes a refusal of an application, the deciding agency must decide the application again in line with the determination.(Art. 50(1), Art. 51(1), Art. 52(1), Art. 52(2)) (the provisions it rests on)
• The Act's one penalty, in Article 87, is for a member of the Administrative Complaint Review Board who discloses a secret learned in office, while serving or after leaving: imprisonment (拘禁刑) of up to one year or a fine of up to 500,000 yen.(Art. 87(1), Art. 69(8)) (the provisions it rests on)