Ernest Schaal wrote:

> in article 40EA568B.8050207@hotmail.com, Declan Murphy at
> declan_murphy@hotmail.com wrote on 7/6/04 4:36 PM:

>>The point I was making was that *in the context* of this issue your
>>point isn't particularly relevant. We aren't talking about an immigrant,
>>or an asylum seeker, the kid is the legal dependant of a Japanese
>>national and currently in Japan - there is no particular reason why PR
>>status shouldn't be granted, or a bridging equivalent. A Japanese
>>citizen or legal foreign resident should have every right to expect that
>>their children will not be forcibly separated from them through no fault
>>of their own. That the issue has even become news at all suggests that
>>the current legal immigration legal framework has cracks people can fall
>>through.
> 
> I think you are missing my point. If she comes here and stays, she will be
> an immigrant. Her visa might be different than some other immigrants, but
> she still is an immigrant, and the nation has full control of deciding those
> matters.

I fully understand your point (and the associated nitpicks - one of the 
benefits of being an Application Agent for the Immigration Bureau is 
reasonable access to staff and familiarity with procedures). What I 
disagree with is the notion that the state has to right to refuse entry 
to the legal child/spouse/dependant of a citizen. I think there is 
something missing from the article (I still haven't found the original 
July 3rd Japanese article) - perhaps the legal adoption is not yet 
completed, or perhaps the petitioners do not understand fully the 
processes of obtaining permanent residence, or whether it is appropriate 
in the case. Either way, there should be no need or requirement for her 
to leave the country, even temporarily.

> As to what the citizen or legal foreign resident has the "right" to expect,
> if you mean that the expectation is not unreasonable I would agree with you,
> but if you mean that they have a legal "right" to a particular outcome I
> would disagree with you.
> 
> Do I want the child to be allowed to stay? Yes, I do.
> 
> Do I think it is my business, or your business, or Raj's business to dictate
> to the Japanese Government what they should do? No. I do not.
<snip>
> Basically, unless you are Japanese citizen, you have ZERO right to demand
> anything.

There is a difference between petitioning/requesting and such, and your 
language "dictate"/"demand", and yes the opinions of citizens carry (as 
they should) more weight than those of non-citizens (particularly short 
term visitors), but no, the idea that a non-citizen has zero right to 
request fair and sensible assessment of visas or anything else is over 
the top and incorrect. Japanese law does extend considerable protections 
to non-citizens, even to tourists in Gifu. A non-citizen such as this 
child, should have the right to be with her (legal) father, simply on 
the basis that the resident is a resident citizen.

-- 
"You're not drunk if you can lie on the floor without holding on"