The Basic Resident Registration Law, established in 1967, had a disclose principle at first. Everyone could ask mayors to inspect a Basic Resident Registration and execute a resident card, and the mayors couldn't refuse the request unless there were special obstacles for their administrative work or some reasons that justified the refusal.

 According to the FAQ about the proposal of the Basic Resident Registration Law made by the Ministry of Home Affairs, the reason of such a treatment was that "the Basic Resident Registration System certifies a residency and is used for all of public services for every resident of both the central government and the local governments in Japan. So we disclose it to everyone and try to maximize its administrative utility for both the residents and the governments. In addition, we affirm that there is no possibility of an infringement on an individual's secret because of the disclose principle. The reasons are that currently all of descriptions of a family registration, which certify a statue of an individual, are already disclosed for everyone (Article 10 of the Family Registration Law), and that descriptions of a Basic Resident Registration are not an individual's secret, which should be protected." "Reasons that justify the refusal" is the cases that "the mayors loose, or waste, a Basic Resident Registration because of disasters, a requester doesn't pay a fee for an inspection, many requesters want to inspect it at the same time ..." etc, according to the FAQ. (The Ministry of Home Affairs, Materials about the Basic Resident Registration System (1), pp181-2)

 The 1985 reform of the Basic Resident Registration Law modified a part of this disclose system. The reason of this reform was that some problems related to social discrimination by using this system, for example making lists of residents by copying a Basic Resident Registration to purchase to the general public, inspecting whether he/she was from a discriminated area, and so on. In addition, after the 1985 reform, mayors could provide all or a part (1) a name, 2) a date of birth, 3) male/female, 4) a domicile) of a copy of a Basic Resident Registration instead of the Basic Resident Registration itself when they had a request of an inspection. After the 1999 reform, an inspection of a Basic Resident Registration itself was abandoned. So now, only an inspection of a part of its copy is possible.

 The current system (1) an inspection of a part (name, date of birth, male/female and domicile) of a copy of a Basic Resident Registration, 2) issue of a copy of a resident card and a certification of the descriptions of the resident card and 3) issue of a copy of an additional card to a family registration) is following.

 Finally, from a certain date up to August 2004 that will be decided by a cabinet order, by sending the descriptions of his/her resident card through the Basic Resident Registration Network, a requester will be able to get a copy of the resident card about the requester and his/her household memberships (excluding the indication of his/her family registration) a at every municipality only by showing his/her Basic Resident Registration Card or his/her Identification Card with his/her photograph. (Article 12-2 of the Basic Resident Registration Law)

　

<2> Requirements for a Request

　

 Everyone is entitled to request mayors to inspect a part of a copy of a Basic Resident Registration, to issue a copy of a resident card and a certification of the descriptions of the resident card (excluding a cord of the Resident Card) and to issue a copy of an additional card to a family registration. (Article 11, Paragraph 1, Article 12, Paragraph 2 and Article 20, Paragraph 1 of the Basic Resident Registration Law) But, the requester is obliged to respect fundamental rights of individuals and not to infringe the rights when he/she use information known by the inspection etc. Following this basic principle, a requester needs to clarify a reason of his/her request, his/her name and domicile, a range of residents for the request (in case of a request for issuing a copy of a resident card and a certification of the descriptions of the resident card, "a name and domicile of residents for the request", and in case of issuing a copy of an additional card to a family registration, "an indication of the family registration enrolled in the supplement for the request) (Article 11, Paragraph 1, Article 12, Paragraph 3 and Article 20, Paragraph 2 of the Basic Resident Registration Law)

 According to "The Guideline of the Treatment of the Basic Resident Registration" (by the Administrative Promoting Division of MHA), 1) the mayors have to clarify reasons why a requester asks to inspect a part of a copy of a Basic Resident Registration as "Reasons for a Request". And when they cannot clarify the reasons, if possible, they must ask the requester questions about the reasons and confirm them. 2) They should require a signature of a requester on "a Name and a Domicile of a requestor" to clarify an intention to request an inspection. 3) They should confirm "a Range of Residents" for an inspection as clear as possible.

 But, mayors have only to clarify only a name and domicile of a requester and a range of residents for an inspection, and need not to clarify reasons for a request if the requester is a following (Article 3 of the ministry order for issuing basic resident registration cards and Article 2 of the ministry order for issuing additional cards to the family registration).

　

　

<3> Restriction of an Inspection

　

 Mayors can refuse a request to inspect a part of a copy of a Basic Resident Registration, issue a copy of a resident card or a certification of the descriptions of the resident card, and issue a copy of an additional card to a family registration if 1) the request is explicitly for undue purposes (Article 11, Paragraph 3, Article 12, Paragraph 5 and Article 20, Paragraph 2 of the Basic Resident Registration Law). They also be able to refuse a request to inspect a part of a copy of a Basic Resident Registration if 2) there is a fear to use information known from the inspection for undue purposes, and 3) there is an enough reason to refuse the request (Article 11, Paragraph 3 of the Basic Resident Registration Law).

 "Undue purposes" on 1) are those intentions to inspect the descriptions of the resident card or disclose them even though a requester doesn't have any enough necessity or reasonability in general to know the descriptions of others'. For example, a mayor can consider that a request is without reasons 1) in case that an a requester tries to inspect the descriptions about a relationship between a householder and an enrolled person, which the person wouldn't like to let the requester know, or disclose such information for an infringement of a privacy of the person or 2) in case that a requester tries to know the person's origin for the purpose to discriminate him/her by inspecting the descriptions of the resident card. (1986/02/04 Notice)

 The meaning of both "a fear to use an information known from the inspection for undue purposes" for 2) and "an enough reason to refuse the request" for 3) is in case that there is a high possibility to use information known by an inspection of a part of a copy of a Basic Resident Registration for undue purposes. For example, a request is considered to have the high possibility in case that a requester intends to make lists of residents for the purpose of discrimination or to distribute or sell the lists to the general public. A mayor is sometimes able to refuse a request from a requester who repeats to violate the provision of Article 50 of the Basic Resident Registration Law (inspecting a Basic Resident Registration, or having issue a copy of a resident card or that of an additional card to a family registration by illegal means). (1986/02/04 Notice)

 The refusal reason of mayors which was allowed by the before-1985 reform-provision of Article 11, Paragraph 2 of the Basic Resident Registration Law, "in case that the mayors loose, or waste, a Basic Resident Registration because of disasters, a requester doesn't pay a fee for an inspection, many requesters want to inspect it at the same time..." is still effective even though there is no explicit provision about it after the 1985 reform. (1986/02/04 Notice)

 On the other hand, a requester is still allowed to inspect a copy of a Basic Resident Registration in case that he/she uses information for a poll, an academic research or a market research (including for the purpose to send direct-mails), uses it to confirm a name and domicile of a customer for trade or business, or uses it for financing or credit-ensuring, and mayors consider there is enough reason in those cases.

 In addition there is a sanction, a fine under 100,000-yen, in case that a requester 1) inspects a copy of a Basic Resident Registration, 2) has issue a copy of a resident card or a certification of the descriptions of the resident card, or 3) has issue an additional card to a family registration by illegal means. (Article 50 of The Basic Resident Registration Law) Summary Courts are in charge of judgments about it. (Article 52 of the Basic Resident Registration Law)