DESK REVIEW ON POPULATIONS AT RISK OF STATELESSNESS PSA with subsequent approval by the Secretary of Justice.197 Furthermore, by electing Filipino nationality, the person would have to renounce Japanese nationality. The PNLSC has suggested that the Philippines has shown greater flexibility than Japan, but that things have become stricter recently. Once the BI recognizes that the person was born to a Japanese father married to a Filipino mother between 1930-1973, they say the person is not eligible to obtain a passport/travel document. For example, the PNLSC stated during an interview that it conducts annual “homecoming tours” among PJD, and there are new documentary requirements before travel documents are issued, such as the Certificate recognizing them as stateless. PNLSC reports that this is another reason that PJD are approaching the DOJ-RSPPU for recognition of stateless status, to facilitate travel to Japan and prevent denial of re-entry to the Philippines. C.4. Japan: Context and Cultural Background In 1984, when the Nationality Act was amended to allow citizenship to be passed from women as well as men, the Ministry of Justice Civil Affairs Bureau Director Mr. Kiyoshi Hosokawa commented that, “Japan does not need to adopt the jus soli principle due to the scarce possibility that it would accept a large number of immigrants,” and went on to explain that, “Japan as a country has always been a mono-ethnic State with a single language, culture and history. A deeply rooted tradition of jus sanguinis lies within society, and this has been related to the country’s identity. Jus sanguinis in our Nationality Act has been established on this tradition and consciousness, and at present, the Japanese would not be a in a position to accept jus soli.”198 Furthermore, Japan places an emphasis on the importance of the family and social harmony. Particular duties arise from one’s situation in relation to others, and the individual always stands simultaneously in several different relationships with different people, such as: a junior in relation to parents and elders, a senior in relation to younger siblings and children, DOJ has noted that there may be an argument for delayed election beyond the three-year time frame on humanitarian grounds, but as things stand, to allow such delayed election could also be seen to contradict existing jurisprudence. (See, Re: Application for Admission to the Philippine Bar of Vicente D. Ching, B.M. No. 914, 1 October 1999, 316 SCRA 1, 10-11, “The span of years that lapsed from the time he reached the age of majority until he finally expressed his intention to elect Philippine citizenship is clearly way beyond the contemplation of the requirement of electing ‘upon reaching the age of majority’ …One who is privileged to elect Philippine citizenship has only an inchoate right to such citizenship. As such, he should avail of the right with fervor, enthusiasm and promptitude. Sadly, in this case, Ching slept on his opportunity… as a result, this golden privilege slipped away from his grasp.”). PJD’s would also have to avail themselves of delayed election, and by electing Filipino nationality, the person would have to renounce Japanese nationality. If they do not avail of delayed election, then the DOJ is constrained to rule that the PJD are stateless. 197 Abe Kohki, Overview of Statelessness: International and Japanese Context, UNHCR, April 2010, available at: https://www. refworld.org/docid/4c344c252.html (citing: Ministry of Justice Civil Affairs Bureau Legal Affairs Study Group ed., Kaisei kokusekiho, kosekiho no kaisetsu(Interpretation of the Revised Nationality Act, Family Registry Law) (1985), p.8.). 198 UNHCR / April 2021 65