Overstaying in Japan After Divorce or Bereavement on a Dependent Visa: Revocation, Long-Term Resident Status and Special Permission to Stay

Your spouse or parent, the person whose status of residence supported yours, has passed away or you have divorced. In the months that followed, grief and the practical work of rebuilding daily life took everything you had, and the date printed on your residence card came and went. You are still in Japan, and the period of stay has expired. In our consultations, this is a familiar story. Almost no one in this situation set out to ignore the rules; they were simply holding a household and, very often, children together.

Japanese immigration law, however, does not allow an expired period of stay to continue, whatever the reason. And for holders of the Dependent status of residence (家族滞在, kazoku taizai), the risk begins before the expiry date arrives. This article sets out, provision by provision, what happens at each stage and what options remain open to you now.

Does my Dependent status end immediately when my sponsor dies or we divorce?

No. Your status of residence does not disappear automatically at the moment of divorce or bereavement. Until the period of stay expires, you formally still hold the Dependent status. But that is not the same as being safe.

Dependent is a status listed in Appended Table I of the Immigration Control and Refugee Recognition Act (Immigration Control Act, 入管法). The activity it authorises is daily life as the spouse or child receiving support from a person residing in Japan under a status of residence. Once the relationship with that sponsor ends, the foundation of that activity is gone. Two separate risks follow: your application to extend the period of stay may be refused, and your status may be revoked even before the expiry date.

Will my status of residence be revoked three months after the divorce or death?

It can be. Article 22-4, paragraph (1), item (vi) of the Immigration Control Act provides that where a foreign national residing under a status of residence listed in Appended Table I has not engaged in the activity corresponding to that status continuously for three months or more, and there is no justifiable reason for not doing so, the Minister of Justice may revoke the status of residence.

Dependent is an Appended Table I status, so if you stop living as the supported spouse or child and that state of affairs continues, the provision can apply. Read the other way, revocation does not follow where a justifiable reason is recognised. Preparing an application to change your status of residence so that you can raise your child, having already filed such an application, or delays caused by a funeral and the settlement of an estate after your sponsor died, are all matters that should be explained. What matters is not holding those reasons in your head, but assembling the documents and explaining them yourself at the regional immigration services bureau.

If you remain in Japan after your status has been revoked, the criminal provisions of Article 70, paragraph (1), items (iii), (iii)-2 and (iii)-3 come into play. The moment you receive a revocation notice is still a moment at which choices exist.

What am I liable for once my period of stay has expired?

Liability runs along two tracks: criminal responsibility, and the administrative deportation procedure.

On the criminal side, Article 70, paragraph (1), item (v) punishes a person who remains in Japan beyond the period of stay without having received an extension or a change of status. Under the main clause of that paragraph, the statutory penalty is a kōkinkei (custodial sentence) of not more than three years, a fine of not more than three million yen, or both. Overstaying is not a mere paperwork delay; it is treated as a crime.

On the administrative side, Article 24, item (iv)(b) makes a person who remains beyond the period of stay subject to deportation. The procedure runs from a violation investigation by an immigration control officer, to detention under a written detention order or a decision on supervision measures, to examination and findings by an immigration inspector, to a request for an oral hearing and the determination of a special inquiry officer, and finally to an objection to the Minister of Justice and a decision on it. Where you stand in that sequence determines what is still available to you.

Can I change to a Long-Term Resident status after a divorce or bereavement?

While your period of stay is still valid, you may apply under Article 20 of the Immigration Control Act for permission to change your status of residence. Where your life is genuinely established in Japan and you are actually caring for and raising a child who holds Japanese nationality or a status of residence, a change to Long-Term Resident (定住者, teijūsha) may be considered. Whether permission is granted, however, lies within the discretion of the Minister of Justice, and the outcome turns on the individual circumstances. No one can tell you it will certainly be approved.

The point to hold on to is this: once the period of stay has expired, this route is closed. After expiry, the only remaining path is to seek special permission to stay within the deportation procedure. The wish is the same in both cases, to raise your child in Japan, but the road is far harder on the wrong side of the expiry date.

Will the fact that I am raising a child in Japan be taken into account?

Yes. Article 50, paragraph (5) sets out by statute the matters the Minister of Justice considers: the reasons for wishing to stay, family circumstances, conduct, the circumstances in which the person came to Japan, the length of residence in Japan and the legal status held during that time, the facts giving rise to deportation, and the need for humanitarian consideration. Domestic and international circumstances and the effect on illegal residents in Japan, among other matters, are also considered. Raising a child who was born and brought up here and attends school in Japanese speaks to both family circumstances and humanitarian need.

The basis for special permission to stay is Article 50, paragraph (1); most cases fall under item (v), where the Minister finds special circumstances warranting permission. The proviso to that paragraph imposes a heavier requirement on persons sentenced to a kōkinkei for life or for more than one year, among others, allowing permission only where the Minister finds special circumstances such that refusing it would be lacking in humanitarian consideration. Importantly, a case involving only unlawful residence, that is, one falling only under Article 24, item (iv)(b), is not subject to that proviso. That is a favourable starting point. Conversely, if a criminal court imposes an unsuspended sentence exceeding one year, the heavier requirement applies and the outlook becomes markedly harder.

Procedurally, an application for special permission may be made by a person detained under a written detention order or subject to a decision on supervision measures (Article 50, paragraph (2)); before that stage, the work is to ask the authorities to act on their own authority. Once a written deportation order has been issued, no application can be made (paragraph (3)). Where permission is refused, the person is notified in writing with reasons (paragraph (10)). The window in which you can act is fixed by statute.

If I leave under a departure order, when can I return to Japan?

A person who leaves Japan under a departure order is denied landing for one year from the date of departure, under Article 5, paragraph (1), item (ix)(e). The departure order procedure does not presuppose detention: a supervising immigration inspector orders departure and fixes a deadline not exceeding fifteen days (Article 55-85, paragraph (1)).

To use it, however, all five requirements of Article 24-3 must be met.

• Appearing voluntarily at an immigration office before a violation investigation under Article 27 has begun (item (i)(a)), or expressing the intention to leave promptly after the investigation has begun but before receiving the notice under Article 47, paragraph (3) (item (i)(b))
• Not falling under Article 24, items (iii) through (iii)-5, item (iv) sub-items (c) through (yo) (4号ハからヨまで), item (viii) or item (ix)
• Not having been sentenced to a kōkinkei after entering Japan for any of the Penal Code and related offences listed in that Article
• Never having been deported from Japan, and never having departed under a departure order
• Being reasonably expected to leave Japan promptly

If the requirements are not met and deportation follows, the period of denial of landing is five years from the date of deportation for a person with no prior deportation or departure order (Article 5, paragraph (1), item (ix)(c)), and ten years for a person who already has such a history (item (ix)(d)).

Why acting before you are detected matters

A divorce or a death leaves traces that can be checked from outside: the family register, the resident record, the records of your sponsor employer. In Dependent cases in particular, the assumption that no one will notice does not hold. The order in which you act is what separates outcomes.

Article 24-3, item (i)(a) treats as eligible for a departure order a person who, before a violation investigation under Article 27 has begun, appears voluntarily at an immigration office with the intention of leaving Japan promptly. In that case the denial of landing after departure is one year (Article 5, paragraph (1), item (ix)(e)). By contrast, where the intention to leave is expressed only after the investigation has begun (item (i)(b)), the denial of landing becomes five years if the person later seeks to come to Japan for activities as a Temporary Visitor (Article 5, paragraph (1), item (ix)(f)). The outcome, going home, is the same; the difference in timing changes when you may next come to see your family in Japan.

The same holds where special permission is sought. The Guidelines on Special Permission to Stay (revised in March 2024 and in force from 10 June 2024) describe special permission as an exceptional and discretionary measure for foreign nationals who are to be deported, and state expressly that appearing voluntarily at a regional immigration services bureau in order to report one own unlawful residence is treated as a positive factor. Prolonged unlawful residence, by contrast, is treated as a negative factor. Time is not on your side.

About our office

Funado International Law Office (Fuse Building Main Wing 3F, 3-4-10 Takada, Toshima-ku, Tokyo) concentrates on criminal defence for foreign nationals and on immigration procedures, with a client base centred on Chinese nationals. Cases are handled by Daisuke Matsumura, attorney at law, a member of the Dai-ichi Tokyo Bar Association (registration number 59077, admitted 2019).

From the first detention visit through to the close of trial, Mr Matsumura handles every stage of the case personally; the work is not delegated to clerks or junior lawyers. A dedicated Chinese interpreter experienced in cases involving foreign nationals is based at the office, so that clients can use an interpreter who works for them rather than one designated by the investigating authorities; for other languages, an interpreter is arranged according to the needs of the case. Renewals and changes of status of residence after the criminal process ends are handled together with an affiliated administrative scrivener.

Two past matters close to the situation described here:

Case 1　A client who had come to Japan as a tourist had a child with a Japanese woman, lost his status of residence, and was arrested and prosecuted for unlawful residence. The marriage and acknowledgment of paternity had not been completed and the authorities initially refused to accept the filings; Mr Matsumura negotiated on constitutional grounds, the filings were accepted, and despite the near absence of official documents from the country of nationality he gathered favourable evidence and obtained special permission to stay in a single round of proceedings.

Case 2　A woman accused of promoting unlawful employment faced deportation. Against the settled practice that intent or negligence is not required for a ground of deportation, we brought proceedings testing how far the principle of culpability reaches and litigated to the appellate level. Special permission to stay was subsequently granted by the immigration authorities.

The first consultation is free of charge, and fees are quoted according to the matter. We take consultations both while a period of stay is still valid and after it has expired.

Closing

Losing the person who supported your status is not a question of how hard you have tried. By the design of the system, a deadline is always approaching. Whether a change of status is available, whether a departure order is available, or whether the case must be argued as one for special permission to stay, depends entirely on which stage you are at now. The longer the decision is postponed, the narrower the road becomes.

This article is a general explanation. Please consult a lawyer directly about your own case. Past results reflect the particular circumstances of those matters and do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Author

Daisuke Matsumura, Attorney at Law

Dai-ichi Tokyo Bar Association (registration number: 59077, admitted 2019)

Funado International Law Office (Fuse Building Main Wing 3F, 3-4-10 Takada, Toshima-ku, Tokyo)

Concentrates on criminal defence for foreign nationals and immigration procedures, with a client base centred on Chinese nationals.

Results include an acquittal in a case under the Stimulants Control Act (possession for the purpose of profit), a decision not to prosecute in a specialised fraud case, and special permission to stay in matters regarded as difficult.

Contact

Funado International Law Office

Website: https://matsumura-lawoffice.jp/

WeChat ID: matsumura1119

Other language versions of this article

日本語 / 简体中文 / 繁體中文 / Tiếng Việt / 한국어