Can I Ever Return to Japan After a Drug Conviction? Article 5(1)(v) and the Denial of Landing With No Time Limit

Even if you have to leave, you want to come back one day. We have heard that from many people who left family behind in Japan, or whose work or studies here were cut short. How many years until I can enter again is one of the most common questions we receive. For drug offences, the answer has to be different from the answer given in other categories, because Article 5(1)(v) of the Immigration Control and Refugee Recognition Act (入管法) contains no number of years to wait. For those thinking about returning, and for their families, this article sets out exactly how the provision works.

Key points

• Article 5(1)(v) makes a ground for denial of landing (上陸拒否) the fact of having been sentenced to a punishment for violating legislation on the control of drugs.
• Article 5(1)(ix) sets periods of one year, five years and ten years for matters such as deportation history, but item (v) has no period at all.
• There is therefore no mechanism by which the passage of time extinguishes the ground for denial of landing under item (v).
• Item (v) is satisfied by having been sentenced to a punishment, so a fine is enough, and violations of the law of countries other than Japan are included.
• Where item (v) applies, what remains is the route of special permission for landing under Article 12(1).

What kind of provision is Article 5(1)(v)?

Article 5(1) lists, item by item, the foreign nationals who may not land in Japan. Item (v) covers a person who has been sentenced to a punishment for violating the laws or regulations of Japan or of any other country relating to the control of narcotics, cannabis, opium, stimulants or psychotropic substances.

This provision operates in a different setting from deportation. Deportation (退去強制) is the process of removing from Japan a person who is already here; denial of landing is a decision made when a person outside Japan seeks to enter. So a foreign national involved in a drug case faces two provisions: Article 24, item 4, sub-item (chi) (入管法24条4号チ) at the exit, and Article 5(1)(v) at the entrance.

It helps to look at the neighbouring items in Article 5(1). Item (iv) covers people who have been sentenced, for violating any law or regulation, to imprisonment for one year or more or an equivalent punishment. Item (vi) covers people unlawfully possessing narcotics, psychotropic substances, poppies, opium, poppy straw, stimulants, raw materials for stimulants, or utensils for smoking opium, and item (viii) covers people unlawfully possessing firearms, swords and similar items.

How many years do I have to wait before I can enter Japan again?

On this we have to be blunt. Article 5(1)(v) prescribes no waiting period. There is no mechanism under which the ground for denial of landing lapses automatically once a certain number of years has passed.

The item that does set periods is item (ix). It lists people falling within its sub-items (i) through (he) who have not yet completed the period specified for each. Sub-item (i), for instance, sets one year from the date of refusal for a person refused landing under item (vi) or item (viii). Sub-item (ro) sets one year from the date of departure for a person deported under any item of Article 24 (other than item 4, sub-items (o) through (yo), and item 4-3) who received a determination under Article 52(5) and departed, by the date specified by Ministry of Justice Ordinance, under the permission in Article 52(4) (excluding a person seeking to enter as a temporary visitor). Sub-item (ha) and those that follow set five years or ten years according to deportation history.

In short, denial of landing based on the fact of deportation comes with a term of years, and so with a way out. Denial of landing based on having been sentenced to a punishment for a drug offence, under item (v), has no such way out. Item (v) continues to apply even after the item (ix) period has safely expired. This asymmetry is one of the most commonly misunderstood points we encounter.

A fine is enough, and foreign convictions count

What Article 5(1)(v) requires is having been sentenced to a punishment. There is no restriction as to the type of sentence, so a matter that ended in a fine falls within it. Set against item (iv), which sets a threshold of imprisonment for one year or more or an equivalent punishment, it is clear that for drugs the threshold has simply been removed.

Item (v) also covers violations of the laws or regulations of Japan or of any other country. It is not confined to punishments imposed in Japan. A record of having been sentenced for a drug offence in your home country or in a third country can therefore become an issue when you seek to land in Japan.

What remains is special permission for landing

Where Article 5(1)(v) applies, ordinary permission to land is not contemplated. What remains is the route under Article 12(1): special permission for landing, granted in the discretion of the Minister of Justice.

Because this is by nature an exceptional decision, we cannot offer light predictions about it. In practice, the work consists of setting out carefully the relationship with family remaining in Japan, the years that have passed since departure, how the person has lived and what they have done to rebuild in that time, and the purpose of the proposed travel, and then putting all of it into documentary form. Even with all of that done, the decision turns on the individual circumstances. Telling someone that time will take care of it would not be honest, and we do not say it.

There is far more that can be done while you are still in Japan

We design the defence of a foreign national's drug case in three lines. The first is a non-prosecution decision (不起訴処分) in the criminal case. We examine whether the elements of the offence are made out, whether the requisite intent existed, and whether the evidence, including any stop-and-question and urine sampling, was lawfully gathered, and within the short pre-charge period we assemble the material for the prosecutor's decision. Where there is no prosecution, there is no conviction, so neither Article 24(4)(chi) nor, in the future, Article 5(1)(v) has its requirement satisfied.

The second line is to contest, in the deportation process, whether the ground for deportation is made out at all. The third is special permission to stay (在留特別許可), where we turn each of the factors set out in Article 50(5), namely the reasons for wishing to stay, family circumstances, conduct, the circumstances of entry, the length of residence, the legal status held during that time, the facts giving rise to the ground for deportation, and the need for humanitarian consideration, into documented material. If you are able to remain in Japan, the question of denial of landing never arises.

How our office works, and matters we have handled

At Funado International Law Office, attorney Daisuke Matsumura handles the matter personally from the first detention visit through to the close of trial, and the work is not passed to clerks or junior lawyers. For Chinese, a dedicated interpreter experienced in cases involving foreign nationals is on staff, so that alongside the interpreter appointed by the investigating authorities you have an interpreter working for you throughout the criminal process. For languages other than Chinese, we arrange an interpreter to suit the case. After the criminal process, renewals and changes of status of residence (在留資格) are handled together with an affiliated administrative scrivener.

On protecting residence, we acted for a person who had come to Japan as a tourist, lost their status of residence, and was arrested and prosecuted for unlawful residence. The application was initially refused on the basis that the marriage and the acknowledgment of the child were incomplete; we negotiated with the authorities from a constitutional standpoint until the marriage and acknowledgment were established, gathered favourable evidence in conditions where almost no official documents from the country of nationality existed, and, through analysis of the immigration authorities' past grants, obtained special permission to stay on a single application.

In a matter concerning a woman wrongly accused of promoting illegal employment and facing deportation, we obtained special permission to stay, which is without precedent in a case where promoting illegal employment had been found, and we are currently litigating a challenge to the established practice under which intent and negligence are treated as unnecessary for grounds for deportation. We also have experience of international criminal matters, of cases tried before lay judge panels, and of serious cases reported worldwide.

It is uncomfortable to answer the question how many years until I can come back by saying that no number of years exists. But knowing that early has value of its own, because the range of what can be done while you are still in Japan is nothing like the range of what remains after you have left. Please note that this article is general commentary only; for your own situation, speak to a lawyer directly. The past matters described here turned on their own particular facts, and they are not a guarantee of a similar outcome.

This article reflects the law as at August 2026.

About the author

Daisuke Matsumura, Attorney at Law
Dai-Ichi Tokyo Bar Association (registration no. 59077, admitted 2019)
Funado International Law Office (Fuse Building Main Wing 3F, 3-4-10 Takada, Toshima-ku, Tokyo)
Practice focused on criminal defence for foreign nationals and immigration proceedings.
Results include an acquittal in a Stimulants Control Act case (possession for the purpose of profit), non-prosecution in organised fraud cases, and special permission to stay in cases regarded as difficult.

Funado International Law Office
Website: https://matsumura-lawoffice.jp/
WeChat ID: matsumura1119