This means the destination of deportation needs to be determined after verifying the concerned person’s wish and taking it into consideration. However, while A wished to be deported to a country other than Georgia, the relevant regional immigration bureau had designated Georgia to be the destination country. At any rate, deportation of a stateless person is not enforceable unless the designated country of destination is willing to accept such a stateless person. In such a case, the stateless person concerned is highly likely to either remain in detention indefinitely or left without financial means to sustain his or her living while under a provisional release permit. In particular, currently gainful employment of illegal stayers is being rigorously cracked down. Those who employ illegal stayers are highly likely to be punished, which makes it difficult to find any employment in reality.228 4. Possible size of Category J (1) Unique nature of this category Case 18 represents persons whose previous country of nationality disintegrated, and who could not acquire the nationality of the successor State. The cause of statelessness is similar to that of Category B [State succession I]. While the statelessness of the person involved in the case under Category B arose while he or she was in Japan, the situation of persons under this category differs in the sense that they arrived in Japan after becoming stateless abroad. Furthermore, there is a significant difference between persons under Category B and this category in terms of their legal status upon entry into Japan. In the case under Category B, the person involved arrived in Japan with an actual nationality and a valid passport. In the case introduced for Category J, the person entered Japan with a forged passport while already stateless. This difference can be attributed to the fact that stateless persons face great difficulties in legally crossing the border. Even a stateless person can be granted protection like other foreign nationals if recognized as a refugee or granted special permission for residency on humanitarian grounds. If this is not the case, a stateless person cannot receive effective protection in Japan. A refugee status application was made in both cases under Categories B and J. Unlike the person involved in the case under B, which had been granted certain kinds of protection, the person in the case under J was not granted such protection. The person in Category J’s case also represents the reality that even if a stateless person without a residency permit is issued with a deportation order, its enforcement tends to be difficult country where his or her place of birth is located; (v) A country which contained his or her birthplace at the time of his or her birth; (vi) Any country other than those prescribed in the preceding items.” 228 In the lawsuit, the issues examined together with the legality of the rejection of refugee status were the legality of issuing a deportation order designating a country clearly against the wishes of the individual as the country of destination and whether or not issuance of a deportation order designating a country with no possibility of deportation would qualify as degrading treatment under ICCPR Article 7 and thereby be illegal. 119