Building a Drug Case Around Article 50(5): Facing 'Conduct' and the Offence Itself in a Special Permission Application

People often tell us they have no idea what a special permission to stay (在留特別許可) application is supposed to contain. Write about the family? About remorse? About how hard life has been? Since the 2023 amendment (令和5年改正), Article 50(5) of the Immigration Control and Refugee Recognition Act (入管法) lists the factors in law, so there is now an answer of sorts. This article takes the hardest category, drug cases, and works through what to place under each item, in the order the work is actually done. That includes the two items you cannot walk around: conduct, and the facts giving rise to the ground for deportation.

Key points

• Article 50(5) lists the factors: the reasons for wishing to remain, family circumstances, conduct, the circumstances in which the person came to Japan, the length of residence, the person's legal status during that period, the facts giving rise to the ground for deportation, and the need for humanitarian consideration.
• In drug cases, 'conduct' and 'the facts giving rise to the ground for deportation' are the heaviest items, and an application that avoids them will not persuade.
• Arrangements against relapse have to be shown as concrete medical treatment and supervision, not as a declaration of resolve.
• Article 24(4)(chi) is not listed in the proviso to Article 50(1), so the heightened test does not apply unless the sentence exceeds one year of actual imprisonment.
• This part of the case gains depth when it is begun during the criminal proceedings rather than after them.

Start by getting the list in Article 50(5) exactly right

Article 50(5) directs the Minister of Justice, in deciding on special permission to stay, to consider the following: the reasons the person wishes to remain in Japan, family circumstances, conduct, the circumstances in which the person came to Japan, the length of residence in Japan, the person's legal status during that period, the facts giving rise to the ground for deportation, and the need for humanitarian consideration. Beyond these, the Minister is also to consider domestic and international conditions, the effect on illegal residents in Japan, and other circumstances.

Where the test is heightened is dealt with separately, in the proviso to Article 50(1). For a person sentenced to life imprisonment or to imprisonment (拘禁刑) for more than one year (excluding a person whose sentence is suspended in its entirety, and a person given a partially suspended sentence where the unsuspended portion is one year or less), and for certain other categories, permission may be granted only where refusing it would be found lacking in humanitarian consideration in light of special circumstances. Article 24(4)(chi), the provision covering drug offences, is not in that list.

Which items weigh most heavily in a drug case?

Two of them: conduct, and the facts giving rise to the ground for deportation. Under Article 24(4)(chi) of the Immigration Control and Refugee Recognition Act (入管法24条4号チ), a drug offence is a ground for deportation regardless of the severity of the sentence. And the offence itself is then assessed again, as the fact that gave rise to that ground.

We recommend reversing the instinctive order. Describe how the offence came about, directly. Say specifically what led to the conduct. Then show what has been built so that it does not happen again. An application written in that order lends credibility to everything else in it.

What to build under 'conduct': show a system, not a resolution

What belongs under conduct is not a state of mind but facts that can be verified. Words of remorse have their place, but on their own they give the decision-maker nothing to check.

Some drug cases have dependence in the background and some do not. According to National Police Agency material for 2025, the proportion of first-time offenders in cannabis cases was 72.6 percent, while the reoffending rate in stimulant cases was 64.6 percent. The same label covers cases of very different character. Where dependence is suspected, the key is connecting with medical care; where it is not, the focus is on removing the specific circumstances that led to the conduct.

• Medical records, a doctor's certificate, a treatment plan
• Documents showing participation in a relapse-prevention programme
• A written undertaking from the person who will live with and supervise the client, plus evidence of that person's own circumstances
• A written statement from a supervisor or employer about continued employment and oversight
• Tax certificates, social insurance history, records of attendance at work
• Circumstances showing the absence of any prior convictions or arrests other than this case

How should I describe family circumstances, length of residence and legal status?

The common thread across these items is to avoid abstract nouns and come down to the texture of daily life. On family: who they are, how old, which school, what language is spoken at home. On length of residence: when the person arrived, on what status of residence (在留資格), for how long, and how many renewals were granted. On legal status: whether residence was lawful throughout that period. Each stated concretely.

How to use the item on humanitarian consideration

The need for humanitarian consideration works as a catch-all for circumstances that do not fit neatly under the other headings. In practice, what tends to carry weight is showing precisely who would suffer what concrete harm if deportation were carried out. If a child born and raised in Japan does not speak the language of the country of origin, what happens to that child's schooling? If a family member needs ongoing treatment, how is that treatment to continue? The item takes on substance when it is written from the point of view of the family who would remain in Japan.

At the same time, Article 50(5) also directs attention to domestic and international conditions, the effect on illegal residents in Japan, and other circumstances. Precisely because some of those elements cannot be shifted by the individual case, the items that can be shifted deserve to be filled in carefully and with documents.

The third line of defence, which begins during the criminal case

We design the defence of a foreign national's drug case in three lines. The first is obtaining a decision not to prosecute (不起訴処分) in the criminal case. The second is contesting whether a ground for deportation exists at all. The third is special permission to stay. Building the Article 50(5) factors is the third line.

What matters is that preparation of the third line in fact starts during the criminal proceedings. When treatment began, at what point the supervising family member became involved, whether the employer, knowing about the case, is still willing to take the person back. These are things where the passage of time is itself the evidence, and they cannot be manufactured after the fact.

Sentencing feeds directly into the third line as well. More than one year of actual imprisonment brings Article 24(4)(ri) into play as an additional ground, and triggers the heightened test in the proviso to Article 50(1). That is why the criminal defence and the immigration case have to be designed together.

How our office works, and matters we have handled

At Funado International Law Office (Fuse Building Main Wing 3F, 3-4-10 Takada, Toshima-ku, Tokyo), attorney Daisuke Matsumura handles the work personally, from the first detention visit through to drafting the immigration filings. Placing facts under each item of Article 50(5) is precision work, and it is hard to do well without knowing the details of the case.

For Chinese, we have a dedicated interpreter on staff who is experienced in cases involving foreign nationals, so that you have an interpreter working for you rather than one appointed by the investigating authorities. For other languages, including English, we arrange an interpreter to suit the case. Renewals and changes of status of residence after the proceedings conclude are handled together with an administrative scrivener we work with.

Among the matters we have handled: for a client who had lost their status of residence and was arrested and prosecuted for overstaying, we regularised the family relationships through negotiation with the authorities and analysed previously published grants, obtaining special permission to stay on a single application. We have also obtained special permission to stay in a case involving a finding of promoting illegal employment, where there was no precedent for such a grant, and secured decisions not to prosecute on every count in a case involving collection of money for a specialised fraud operation.

An application for special permission to stay is not an appeal to sentiment. It is the product of placing facts under the headings the statute provides. In drug cases in particular, the courage to begin with the least favourable item is what holds up the persuasiveness of everything that follows. Preparation takes time, so build it up gradually and start early. This article is a general explanation; for your own situation, please consult a lawyer directly. The past matters described here turned on their own particular facts, and no similar outcome can be promised.

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