COVID-19 IMPACTS ON IMMIGRATION DETENTION: GLOBAL RESPONSES INDEFINITE IMMIGRATION DETENTION AND THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC IN JAPAN On 24 June 2019, Sunny, a Nigerian detainee who spent 20 years of his life in Japan, died of starvation in the Omura Immigration Center in Nagasaki.1 Sunny’s tragic death resonated powerfully because he was one of the 200 hunger-striking detainees who challenged the notorious practice of indefinite immigration detention in a most desperate and self-harming manner. 2 A year after Sunny’s death, the landscape of immigration detention has been significantly affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Japan has responded to the pandemic by releasing a large number of migrant detainees. Yet, the overall pattern of human rights violations of migrant detainees, 3 as well as government dismissal of their life conditions does not appear to have shifted. This article documents Japan’s recent measures against the COVID-19 pandemic in the country’s 17 immigration detention facilities. The article also discusses the plight of detainees, as well as of provisionally released migrants. Since the mounting threat of the coronavirus in mid-April 2020, Japan’s Immigration Services Agency (ISA), the country’s sole government agency that manages and operationalizes migrant admissions, detention, and deportation, has implemented a set of pandemic-specific measures to reduce the potential risks of cluster infections in the immigration detention facilities. The overcrowded detention facilities that limit the physical mobility of detainees are seen as an immediate public health threat because detention violates Japan’s coronavirus prevention rules of “Three Cs” (closed spaces, crowded places, and close-contact setting).4 Human rights lawyers argue that the immigration authorities should release detained migrants immediately since no detainee could be deported due to the travel bans in their countries of origin. 5 This is a valid claim because immigration detention was originally designed as a temporary administrative non-punitive measure to ensure the removal of the migrant. As a response to the mounting criticisms of health violations in the detention facilities, ISA released a pandemic health guideline in early May.6 Two crucial measures included in the guideline are the reduction of the number of detained migrants by granting more provisional release permits,7 as well as the reduction of in-person contact among detainees in detention facilities. Between April and August 2020, the number of detained migrants declined to nearly one-third of the original detainee population recorded prior to the pandemic. In June 2019, there were 1,253 migrants held in the country’s 17 immigration facilities. 8 In early April 2020, three weeks after the World Health Organization’s declaration of the coronavirus as a pandemic on 12 March, the total number of detainees still remained at 1,130. However, by early July, the number significantly dropped to 518 and by early September, it declined further 9. According to a local migrant advocacy group, Ushiku-no-kai, the East Japan (Higashi-Nihon) Immigration Center issued more than 170 provisional release approvals between 1 April and 15 June.10 Given the current travel restrictions and bans that are imposed by many countries in the Global South, those who obtained provisional release were technically granted a temporary exemption from deportation during the pandemic. Japan’s provisional release system is considered as an integral measure of noncustodial alternatives to detention that the UN Network on Migration’s Working Group on Alternatives to Immigration Detention emphasizes.11 In addition to releasing a large number of detainees, in-person contact among detainees in these facilities has been significantly minimized. According to Ushiku-no-kai, by mid-July, detainees were no longer sharing their room with other detainees in the East Japan Immigration Center.12 Despite these health prevention measures, detained migrants are continuously exposed to the risks of potential cluster infections. The first case of a detainee being infected by COVID-19 was reported in the Tokyo Regional Immigration Bureau in early August 2020.13 While recognizing the urgency of the current preventive and protection measures, as well as a certain degree of freedoms that long-term detainees are temporarily granted, it would seem that the current “flexible” measures are not grounded on the principle of respect of detainees’ inalienable human rights, especially the rights to life and freedom. These measures fail to recognize the inherent harms and excessive violence that Japan’s contemporary immigration detention system has produced. This is evident by the fact that those who are released are left without any government support or basic protection from increased health risks.14 According to Amigos (Kitakanto Iryosodankai), a migrant health support group, an increasing number of migrants under provisional release are desperately seeking support 1 https://digital.asahi.com/articles/ASM8N64P3M8NUPQJ00P.html 2 https://www.amnesty.or.jp/news/2019/1008_8361.html 3 In this article, I use the term “migrant” to refer to a wide range of non-citizen residents who are indiscriminately subject to the control of domestic immigration laws in the host country. These include undocumented long-term residents, temporary foreign workers, and asylum-seekers. 4 https://www.mhlw.go.jp/content/10900000/000615287.pdf 5 https://www.tokyo-np.co.jp/article/17138 6 http://www.moj.go.jp/content/001319553.pdf 7 http://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/13383320. Another measure was to limit the number of visitors, most of whom are family members and advocacy groups. For example, the East Japan Immigration Center (Ushiku Nyukan) suspended visitations of detainees between late April and early June. 8 https://mainichi.jp/articles/20191110/ddm/005/070/041000c 9 https://www.sankei.com/politics/news/200704/plt2007040019-n1.html Four main facilities house detainees in Japan. These are located in Tokyo, Ibaraki, Nagasaki, and Nagoya. The number of detained migrants in the Tokyo Regional Immigration Bureau was 200 in August 2020. https://mainichi.jp/articles/20200807/ k00/00m/040/224000c?pid=14612. The number of the East Japan Immigration Center (Ibaraki) was 100 in July 2020 (http://www011.upp.so-net.ne.jp/ ushikunokai/). The number of the Omura detention facility (Nagasaki) was 63 in April 2020 https://www.nishinippon.co.jp/item/n/598186/. Although I do not have data on the Nagoya detention facility, the estimated number of detained migrants was about 400 in early September 2020. Thus, two-thirds of the original detainees were released during the pandemic. 10 Members from Ushiku-no-kai regularly visit detained migrants, especially long-term detainees. They have been conducting detention visits since 1994. 11 During the height of the global COVID-19 pandemic in April 2020, major international human rights NGOs and international organizations including UNHCR jointly published a report to demand the immediate release of detained migrants and asylum-seekers from detention facilities (The Working Group on Alternatives to Immigration Detention, United Nations Network on Migration. 2020. COVID-19 & Immigration Detention: What Can Governments and Other Stakeholders Do?). https://migrationnetwork.un.org/sites/default/files/docs/un_network_on_migration_wg_atd_policy_brief_covid-19_and_immigration_detention.pdf) 12 Prior to the pandemic, there were four to five detainees sharing a room (http://www011.upp.so-net.ne.jp/ushikunokai/). 13 https://mainichi.jp/articles/20200807/k00/00m/040/224000c 14 http://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/13383320 idcoalition.org | westernsydney.edu.au/hadri 31