The persons concerned with the review may request the Board the inspection of a written statement of allegations or materials submitted to the Board (for an electronic or magnetic record, the inspection of a media that displays the matters recorded by the method specified by the Board), or the delivery of copies of the written statement of allegations or materials, or a document stating the matters recorded in the electronic or magnetic record. In such a case, the Board may not refuse the inspection or the delivery of the documents unless it is found that the inspection or the delivery is likely to harm the interest of a third party, or there are other legitimate grounds for refusal.
When the Board intends to enable the inspection under the provisions of the preceding paragraph or the delivery under the provisions of that paragraph, the Board must hear the opinions of the persons that have submitted the written statements of allegations or materials to be inspected or delivered; provided, however, that this does not apply if the Board finds it unnecessary.
The board may designate the date of and the place for the inspection under the provisions of paragraph (1).
A requestor for review or an intervenor who receives the delivery under the provisions of paragraph (1) must pay the fees specified by Cabinet Order within an amount not exceeding the actual cost, pursuant to the provisions of Cabinet Order.
When the Board finds that there are financial difficulties or other specific reasons, it may reduce the amount of the fees stated in the preceding paragraph or exempt the relevant person from paying the fees, pursuant to the provisions of Cabinet Order.
(Inspection of Submitted Materials)
The persons concerned with the review may request the Board the inspection of a written statement of allegations or materials submitted to the Board…
審査関係人は、審査会に対し、審査会に提出された主張書面若しくは資料の閲覧（電磁的記録にあっては、記録された事項を審査会が定める方法により表示したものの閲覧）又は当該主張書面若しくは当該資料の写し若しくは当該電磁的記録に記録された事項を記載した書面の交付を求めることができる。
Open this provision(Inspection of Submitted Materials)
A requestor for review or an intervenor who receives the delivery under the provisions of paragraph (1) must pay the fees specified by Cabinet Order within an amount not exceeding the actual cost…
第一項の規定による交付を受ける審査請求人又は参加人は、政令で定めるところにより、実費の範囲内において政令で定める額の手数料を納めなければならない。
Open this provisionintervenor
「参加人」
A person who takes part in a request for review (審査請求) under Article 13, paragraph (1) or (2): an interested person (利害関係人) who joins with the review officer's (審理員) permission, or one the review officer asks to join.
Short name set inArticle 13, paragraph (4)
electronic or magnetic recordmachine translation
「電磁的記録」
A record made in electronic, magnetic or any other form people cannot perceive directly, for use in computer processing.
Defined inArticle 38, paragraph (1)
the Board
「審査会」
The Administrative Complaint Review Board (行政不服審査会) set up in the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications (総務省).
Short name set inArticle 67, paragraph (1)
written statement of allegations
「主張書面」
In the subsection on the Board's (審査会) procedure (Chapter 5, Section 1, Subsection 2), a written statement of their allegations that the Administrative Complaint Review Board (行政不服審査会) may ask the person requesting review (審査請求人), an intervenor (参加人) or the reviewing agency (審査庁) that consulted it to submit.
Short name set inArticle 74, paragraph (1)· applies only in this subsection
persons concerned with the review
「審査関係人」
In the subsection on the Board's (審査会) procedure (Chapter 5, Section 1, Subsection 2), the person requesting review (審査請求人), any intervenor (参加人) and the reviewing agency (審査庁) that consulted the Administrative Complaint Review Board (行政不服審査会) under Article 43, paragraph (1), taken together.
Short name set inArticle 74, paragraph (1)· applies only in this subsection
request for review
審査請求
A request to an administrative agency (行政庁) to review a disposition (処分) the person objects to, or, where the person applied for a disposition under a law or regulation and a reasonable time has passed with none made, the agency's failure to act (不作為) (Administrative Complaint Review Act, Articles 2 and 3). Unless an Act, or for a disposition based on a local ordinance (条例) that ordinance, provides otherwise, it is made to the agency that made the disposition or failed to act where that agency has no superior agency or is itself the competent minister (主任の大臣) or the head of certain agencies; where such a minister or head is the agency above it, to that minister or head; and otherwise to its highest superior agency (Article 4). Another Act can set rules of its own for it, naming another body to make it to or another route (Article 1, paragraph (2); Article 4): the Employees' Pension Insurance Act, for instance, has a request about a disposition (処分) of the Minister of Health, Labour and Welfare (厚生労働大臣) on a person's status as insured, standard remuneration or insurance benefits, other than a decision on a request to correct the pension insurance register, made to a social insurance examiner (社会保険審査官), and disapplies most of the Administrative Complaint Review Act's rules for it (Employees' Pension Insurance Act, Articles 90, paragraph (1), and 91-2). Under the Administrative Complaint Review Act, a request about a disposition must be made within three months of the day after the person learned of it — or one month after learning of the decision, where a request for re-investigation (再調査の請求) was made first — and within a year of the disposition or that decision, unless there is a justifiable reason (Administrative Complaint Review Act, Article 18, paragraphs (1) and (2)). Making one does not by itself stop the disposition taking effect or being carried out, or the proceedings going on (Article 25, paragraph (1)), but the agency reviewing it can suspend them in whole or in part on the application of the person who made the request — and, where it made the disposition or is the agency above the one that did, of its own motion — and, once the person who made the request has applied, must where that is urgently needed to avoid serious harm, unless that would seriously affect the public welfare or the request appears to have no grounds (Article 25, paragraphs (2) to (4)). The agency reviewing it (審査庁) decides it by a determination (裁決): it dismisses a request that is unlawful, for instance one made too late, rejects one that is groundless, and, where one is well founded, revokes the disposition in whole or in part or changes it — though never to the disadvantage of the person who made the request, and an agency that neither made the disposition nor is above the agency that did cannot change it (Articles 45, paragraphs (1) and (2), 46, paragraph (1), and 48). Where the request is about a de facto act (事実上の行為), the determination instead declares the act unlawful or unjust and orders it abolished in whole or in part or changed, or abolishes or changes it (Article 47). A well-founded request about a failure to act ends instead in a determination declaring the failure unlawful or unjust, and, where the agency finds a disposition should be made, an order to make it or the disposition itself (Article 49, paragraph (3)). Where revoking an unlawful or unjust disposition, or abolishing an unlawful or unjust de facto act, would seriously harm the public interest, the agency can reject the request while declaring in the determination that it is unlawful or unjust (Article 45, paragraph (3)). The determination takes effect when it is served on the person who made the request — or, where someone other than the disposition's addressee made it and the determination revokes or changes the disposition or deals with a de facto act, once it is served on the addressee too — and binds the agencies concerned (Articles 51, paragraph (1), and 52, paragraph (1)).
Written by AI using Administrative Complaint Review Act, Arts. 1 to 4, 18, 25, 45 to 49, 51, 52 and Employees' Pension Insurance Act, Arts. 90, 91-2 as a reference.