Volume 12 | Issue 35 | Number 1 | Article ID 4171 | Aug 29, 2014 The Asia-Pacific Journal | Focus

Jus : Household registration and Japanese 戸籍主義 戸籍と日本国籍

Karl Jakob Krogness

on the development of the koseki system (and the changing household unit it shapes) and the The anthology Japan’s household registration outcaste registers of the early modern period, system and citizenship: Koseki, identification as well as early Meijihinin fraternities, and documentation, David Chapman and Karl international marriage, and ways in which the Jakob Krogness, eds. (Routledge 2014) provides koseki as an ordering tool inevitably, down to a first, extensive, and critical overview of today, creates chaos and ‘strangers’ and Japan’s koseki system. Situated from the ‘undecidables.’ seventh century Taika Reforms until today at the center of Japanese governance and society, The following revised chapter from the book the koseki opens up for comprehensive and examines the koseki register as the official deep exploration the Japanese state, family, ledger of citizens 日本国民登録簿( ) and and individual, as well as questions relating to interrogates Japanese legal citizenship: to what citizenship, , and identity. The scope extent is citizenship actually based on the of potential koseki-related research is extensive Japanese Nationality ’s principle ofjus and is relevant for many disciplines including sanguinis (the principle whereby a child’s history, sociology, law, ethnography,citizenship follows that of the parent(s), as anthropology, cultural studies, literature and opposed to , where citizenship follows media studies, gender and queer studies. Given place of birth) when thekoseki register the koseki’s origins in the householdhistorically and structurally is not centered on registration regimes of China and itsbloodlines? The chapter proposes an subsequent influence on the householdalternative principle termed jus koseki, which registration systems of and Taiwan strongly influences Japanese citizenship during the colonial period, thekoseki also bestowal, but also influences Japanese society opens the way for comparative studies within more generally at the level of the state, family and beyond East Asia. and individual. DC and KJK

Koseki has implications for normativity, • • • • • marginalization, exclusion, social order and individual rights. Phenomena examined here The koseki system (戸籍制度) has since early include issues such as reproductiveMeiji exerted profound influence on the technologies, illegitimacy, children of unknown Japanese system. As such, the koseki parentage, individuals lacking koseki in Japan (戸籍) is highly relevant for understanding today or in Colonial Korea, , modern Japanese society at the level of the marriage and ‘same conjugal surname’ (夫婦別 state, the family, and the individual (see for 姓), same-sex partnerships, legal gender example Kawashima 1948; Toshitani 1987b). change, and the intertwinement of family and Earlier Japanese society, too, may fruitfully be citizenship – whether legal, colonial, or sexual. analyzed from the vantage point of the koseki The book also offers an historical perspective system because the history of household-based

1 12 | 35 | 1 APJ | JF registration as an administrative tool for (Kashiwazaki 1998a, 1998b) explore how the ordering and controlling society began already koseki system informed the eventual selection in the seventh century and became crucial in of the principle. She rightly notes the Edo era. that the 1899 represented a balance between adopting western law and This chapter is an initial examination of how maintaining the internal consistency of the household-based registration shapes modern household registration system (Kashiwazaki Japanese society through a principle I propose 1998a: 286). Further, she argues that the to call jus koseki which in Japanese would then western principle of jus sanguinis was chosen 1 be koseki shugi (戸籍主義). Here I specifically because it worked well with the koseki system, explore the influence of thekoseki system in where ‘children’s names are added to the relation to Japanese citizenship, which is based existing registry of their parents. This is on the nationality law principle of jus sanguinis conducive to jus sanguinis in that one’s (血統主義 ), which means ‘the right of blood’ inclusion into the membership circle (the under which the right to citizenship isaggregate of registries) follows from having a bestowed according to the citizenship of one's parent who is a member’ (Kashiwazaki 1998a: parent(s). 296). Kashiwazaki also notes that the Japanese Nationality Law includes elements ofjus soli Jus koseki, then, could translate as ‘the right of (by birth place 出生地主義) and jus domicilis registered household membership’, meaning (by residence) (Kashiwazaki 1998: 279). The jus that registration confers certain rights – in this domicilis principle (住所主義) will be relevant in case citizenship. This right, orjus , signifies broadly that it is reasonable – in fact, that to the later discussion. the majority of the Japanese it is self-evident – Kashiwazaki’s assertion begs the question, that the identification and ordering of the however, to what extent the koseki is conducive individual, the family, and the nation is to jus sanguinis when the family system that determined through household-based koseki represents does not stress bloodline registration. when it comes to continuing the household The authoritative manual for koseki officials, lineage? As Jane Bachnik’s important study on specialists and researchers calledSystematic ie (家) recruitment strategies concludes: Encyclopaedia of Koseki Terminology (Kōzuma ‘although “parents” and “children” do exist in and Tashiro 2001, hereafter ‘thethe ie, its organization is not based on such encyclopaedia’) relates that the koseki records relationships, nor is their existence necessary and documents the family relations of the for its continuity. Kinship […] is merely one citizens of Japan. Also, as non-citizens are not recruitment option for the group-defined recorded in the koseki and every citizen in continuity of theie ’ (Bachnik 1983: 178). principle is recorded in the koseki, the koseki constitutes a ledger of the citizens of Japan. The main focus of Kashiwazaki’s study isjus The principle that every citizen shall be koseki sanguinis so the implications of the close registered has existed from the first Koseki Law relationship between the koseki and Japanese of 1871 and continues today (Kōzuma and citizenship are not explored in more detail. Tashiro 2001: 598).2 What needs to be asked here is: In what ways and to what degree does thekoseki register The English literature on Japanese nationality influence the Japanese citizenship criteria? has neglected to examine the significance ofIndeed, is it relevant, perhaps, to speak of the the koseki register. Kashiwazaki Chikako’s existence of a principle ofjus koseki that comparative studies of Japan’sjus sanguinis influences the stipulated jus sanguinis?

2 12 | 35 | 1 APJ | JF

A note on terminology is appropriate at this family class (zokushō 族称) of ‘peasant’ (nō point. In Japanese legal parlance, the term 農) is noted in the third column from the kokuseki (国籍) can be translated with the right. English terms ‘nationality’ and ‘citizenship’, and the term kokumin (国民) refers to the English terms ‘national’ and ‘citizen’. For the The profound influence of administrative sake of a focused discussion, I will here household registration began with the narrowly follow Andreas Fahrmeir’s definition introduction of the Chinese household of the term citizenship: registration system, which was a central part of the Great Reform (Taika) that began in 646. This system was immediately adapted to “formal citizenship”: the legal contemporary Japanese conditions and aims, definition of a close relationship and one major result was the reorganization of between individuals and one state, the social order. The established usually documented in or very early sectarian inspectionsshūmōn ( other citizenship certificates aratame chō 宗門改長) and censuses (ninbetsu (Fahrmeir 2007: 2). chō 人別帳) that registered the population by household unit. Work on creating a modern household register had already begun in 1868, Here, then, I use the terms kokuseki‘ ’ and and in 1871 the new household registration law ‘nationality’ (e.g.kokusekihō 国籍法, emerged in the form of Edict 170. Japanese Nationality Law ) to refer to this formal society was once again reshaped through a citizenship, and the terms kokumin‘ ’, ‘nation’ household register that fused early modern and ‘nationals’ here simply refer to thehousehold registration with western law; a type aggregate group of Japanese citizens. of civil registration that in the process defined the citizens of the emerging nation-state of The koseki and Japanese nationality Japan.

According to Mukai and the pioneering koseki scholar Toshitani Nobuyoshi, this newkoseki system developed into ‘an indispensable element in the formation of the underlying foundations of the civil law system’ (Mukai and Toshitani 1967: 48). In particular, this was because the koseki system and the ‘ko’ unit (「戸」単位) that developed during early constitute the matrix for the ie‘ ’-type family that was institutionalized in the 1898 (Toshitani 1991: 100–101). Thekoseki system and its ko unit came to profoundly influence the sections in the 1899 Civil Code and, in turn, the Nationality Law.

1. Anonymized photo collage of pages 5-7 The of the 1899 Nationality Law from an 1872 Koseki Book from a village (kokusekihō), which adopted patrilinealjus in Ibaraki Prefecture. The dotted line sanguinis as the basis for citizenship indicates the koseki data pertaining to the acquisition, was a central step towards family residing in dwelling number 4. The becoming a modern nation-state. Yet for almost

3 12 | 35 | 1 APJ | JF three decades nationality had been determined via the koseki register whose main aim was delineating family relations. Indeed, the administrative koseki household, or ‘ko’ unit, that took form between 1871 and 1898 was projected into Meiji family law as the ‘ie’ which was institutionalized with the simultaneous enforcement of the 1898 Civil Code and the 1898 Koseki Law (Toshitani 1991: 101). The Civil Code’s stipulated ‘ie’ family model was, in turn, materialized on the koseki document via household-submitted notifications. In other words, new citizens appeared when they were incorporated as registered members of an ie‘ ’ unit 「( 家」単位) via notifications of birth, marriage, or adoption.

An examination of the modern koseki register is relevant, then, for three reasons. First, koseki registration and citizenship acquisition were intertwined prior to the 1899 Nationality Law. Second, from 1871 to the present the modern household register has consistently constituted a register of the citizens of Japannihon ( kokumin tōrokubo 日本国民登簿) (Kōzuma and 2. Transliteration of the koseki for the Tashiro 2001: 26, 129).3 Third, the registration family in dwelling 4 in a village in Ibaraki of most new citizens occurs at household level Prefecture (pages 5-7 of an 1872 Koseki via birth notifications(shusshō todokeide 出所届 Book). 出), which means that this registration may take second place tomore urgent familyThis investigation of the relationship between formation strategies such as preventing the the koseki and citizenship therefore needs to registration of an illegitimate child. In short, consider the administrative as well as the the koseki register provided the initial basis for social, family-related dynamics that surround citizenship, it became documentation ofthe registration of new citizens. citizenship, and the koseki system leaves the matter of registering new citizens in the hands The koseki system, its functions and its of the households. general principles

Any modern nation-state needs a civil registration system that collects, records and documents individual civil status and civil status changes, as well as family relations.4 Such systems in most developed states register by the unit of the individual, but Japan uses the unit of the administrative household, the ko‘ ’ unit. The koseki system is also distinguished by constituting a citizens’ register. This role is

4 12 | 35 | 1 APJ | JF stipulated in the following representative surname. (art. 6) passages and articles from the koseki of 1871, 1899 and 1947: A child who takes the surname of its father and mother shall enter Edict 170 of 1871, preamble: the koseki of its father and mother.

2. Except for the preceding case, a Furthermore, it is only under the child who takes the surname of the shelter of the government’s father shall enter the koseki of its protection that each and every one father, and a child who takes the of the people may lead a life in surname of the mother shall enter safety. Therefore, those who are the koseki of its mother. not registered or not counted cannot receive this protection and 3. An adopted child shall enter the are as if outside the nation.5 koseki of its adoptive parents. (art. Because of this, the people must be 18) If a new entry in a koseki is to listed in household registers. be made for a person who is not [Italics added] registered in a koseki, a new koseki shall be compiled for the person, excepting aperson who is 6 The 1898 Koseki Law, article 170 : to enter the koseki of his father or mother. (art. 22) A koseki register shall be compiled for each person who establishes a The nationwide census that Edict 170 honseki within the jurisdiction of proclaimed produced during 1872 koseki the koseki registrar. A person who registers (the so-called jinshin koseki) that in does not possess Japanese aggregate constituted the initial list of the nationality cannot establish a nationals of Japan. The 1899 Nationality Law honseki. implied that citizens are those who possess a honseki (permanent register, 本籍). Further, The 1947 Koseki Law: the 1947 Koseki Law stipulated that children could also become listed by ‘entering’ the koseki of their parents, their father, their A new koseki shall be compiled for mother or a koseki newly compiled for that each husband and who purpose. It is striking that these koseki laws on establishes a honseki within the nationality do not specify ‘Japanese parentage’ district of the city, town or village but rather koseki‘ entry’ andhonseki and for their children bearing the possession. I will discuss this in more detail same surname. later. Let us now look closer at thekoseki system. However, in the case of a person who is married to a non-Japanese The koseki operates according to three general individual (hereafter ‘aliens’) or a principles. First, it is the duty of the household person who does not have a to supply data on civil status, civil status spouse, koseki shall be compiled changes and family relations. Second, the unit for such a person and his or her of registration is the ‘ko’ unit. Third, the koseki children bearing the same registers are in principle publicly accessible so

5 12 | 35 | 1 APJ | JF as to serve documentation purposes. reason that the predominance of male koshu.

In other words, data on birth, marriage, divorce, adoption, dissolution of adoption, death and so on, primarily enter thekoseki system via notifications that are submitted by the households in question to the koseki affairs office, which in turn enters these data into the relevant koseki document(s). The koseki clerk only checks whether the notifications are correctly filled out. The underlying facts of the notified matter are not checked and this can open the way for unwitting acceptance of counterfactual notifications. Further, birth notifications are compulsory. Under theKoseki Law, they must be submitted within 14 days from the day of birth and a delay incurs a fine. However, a senior koseki registrar at the Matsuyama City Hall related that delays are not uncommon, and he had never heard of actual fines.7 He also noted that there is no system in place to help kosekithe office identify unregistered children. The same year, the section chief of the Shinjuku Ward koseki office, provided similar answers, but added that parents would normally be motivated to register their children when it came time to welfare benefits, school entry, issuance of passports, etc.8 In sum, the official registration of children as citizens depends on household- level cooperation. 3. Nationwide tally based on the data The pre-war ko unit, which documented the collected in connection with the 1872 multi-generational institutional ‘ie’, comprised Koseki compilation. From Japan Weekly the ‘household head’ (koshu, 戸主) and his Mail 1874. affiliated ‘household members’ (inkoseki - parlance denoted askazoku , 家族).9 The position and the rights of the household head, The household members were listed in the which was stipulated in the 1898 Civil Code, household head’s koseki subsequent to him and was not limited to males. Females household were identified according to their particular heads, also called onna koshu (女戸主) existed. relationship to the household head (e.g. When, for example a female household head ‘grandmother,’ ‘wife,’ ‘eldest daughter,’ married (through the so-callednyūfu , or ‘second brother,’ ‘bride’ [of second brother, for ‘entering husband’-procedure), the husband example], ‘uncle,’ ‘grandchild,’ ‘nephew’). The became a ‘household member’. In thehousehold head was responsible for making following, I use the pronoun ‘him’ to denote the notifications regarding himself and his figure of the household head for no better household members, but notification of births

6 12 | 35 | 1 APJ | JF had to be made by the child’s father. Therefore, the larger ko unit, rather than as individuals. the household head notified the birth of his The ko unit is felt to represent family even children and each male household member though it is an administrative construct that notified the birth of their children. The entry of often does not represent an actual cohabitating extra-marital children, or hi-chakushutsushi 非 family unit. Secondly, under the public access 嫡出子, though, required the consent of the principle, full or partial copies of one’s koseki household head. Extra-marital children were document are issued for documentation subcategorized as shoshi 庶民, if acknowledged purposes. These copies list data on other by their father, and asshiseiji 私生児 if household members as well, and this principle unacknowledged. thus instills a sense that one’s background and family history are potentially open for all to see. Under the present postwar koseki system, the ko unit is a two-generational unit defined asThirdly, the notification principle enables comprising a conjugal couple and their children families to shape theirko unit so that it sharing the same surname (uji, 氏). The duty presents itself positively to seken. Data on one to make notifications today lies with memberthe reflects on the entireko unit, so relevant individuals. For notificationsindividual of members often make life choices in marriage, divorce or adoption, for example, the of all involved; not only fellow ko duty is on the parties involved, and for birth members but also the present and future notifications it is on the parents. surrounding social environment. This includes neighbors, as well as the families or companies Legally, the koseki documents marital that oneself or one’s ko unit members interact relations, legitimacy and parent–child relations with or might one day attempt to join as for example. When submitting notifications that spouses or workers. Notifications that facilitate the formation of such legal relations contribute to the project of configuring a koseki and statuses, the registrants are mindful of the that is perceived favorably byseken have legal recognition thatkoseki notifications generally been pursued, typically avoiding data imply. However, notifications pertaining itemsto such as divorce, fatherlessness and family relations and family-related statuses extramarital children. Koseki consciousness is, most likely have emotional and/or strategic however, also present among individuals, who, motives as well. For individuals, couples and in opposition to the hegemonic family model families, family formation involves affective and that thekoseki presents, seek to configure rational concerns, and they may outweigh alternative family structures within the koseki concerns about citizenship. The registration of matrix, for example via the bunseki (separation a citizen is thus a collateral effect of family- of register, 分籍) notification to mimic a more centered decisions pertaining to a new-born. individualized registration (Krogness 2011: These decisions, in turn, are also informed by a 85–88). prevailing ‘koseki consciousness’,10 which is a concern with how one’s family appears to the Koseki and the theory of recognition surrounding social world (seken, 世間) on their koseki document. The three basickoseki The koseki merely records and documents principles mentioned earlier are crucial to objective data, but given koseki consciousness, understanding koseki consciousness (for the registrants see in the koseki the possibility details, see Krogness 2008: 181–320). of improving their standing in their social environment. Consequently, to assess to what Firstly, the ko unit principle makes the degree micro-level koseki-related decisions registrants perceive themselves as members of influence citizenship, we need an approach that

7 12 | 35 | 1 APJ | JF facilitates a comprehensive view of thedisrespect one experiences there is likely to household register’s variegated and multi-level influence to some extent affective recognition workings, roles and influences. To this end, Iand disrespect in the private sphere. A case in will deploy Axel Honneth’s theory ofpoint may be the prevalent undesirability of recognition. This theory proposes that social extramarital children which is reflected in the interaction is guided by a desire to achieve statistics. They account for about 2 per cent of recognition and avoid the disrespect of others. Japanese births annually (Kōseirōdōsho 2006). The full individuation11 of a person requires Specifying and publicising non-legitimacy, the recognition within three spheres: a struggle for koseki system arguably internalizes and feeds emotional recognition within the private sphere these notions. (love in mother–child relations, or between couples or friends), rational recognition within The pre-war categories of children born out of the sphere of law (e.g. legitimacy, legalwedlock, shoshi and shiseiji, were inscribed in marriage, citizenship, human rights), and a the pre-war koseki to differentiate children’s combined emotional-rational recognition within rights. These categories no longer the organizational sphere (e.g. peers,exist, but the tradition of denoting extra-marital colleagues, unions, clubs, neighborhoods). The birth has continued. Under the present post- latter struggle is both emotional and rational as war system, the birth notification form requires solidarity represents inter-human relations that the parent(s) to identify their child’s legitimacy are both affective and regulated (Honneth on the birth notification form by demarcating it 1998:153ff.; Willig 2003: 7–23). as either an intra-marital child (chakushutsuhi) or extra-marital child (chakushutsu de nai ko). The koseki system is a medium for legal The child’s legitimacy is thus stated clearly on recognition, as it records and documents the birth notification form, but within the citizenship, civil status and family relations. koseki register, this status is stated more The koseki document is also highly relevant in indirectly. Firstly, when listing the names of the the organizational sphere, where full or partial parents of an intra-marital child, the first 12 copies of the koseki (the so-called koseki tōhon registrant (筆頭者) is listed with surname and koseki shōhon, 戸籍謄本 戸籍抄本) have and personal name (e.g. Tanaka ), whereas been used in most of the modern period the spouse (usually the mother) is listed with informally to present one’s backgroundher personal name only (e.g. Mitsuko).13 In case (mimoto, 身元), for example when seeking of an extra-marital birth, each parent is listed school entry, employment and during marriage with both surname and personal name (e.g. negotiations. It is especially in these social Endō and Kawashima Haruko). Second, settings marked by inclusion and exclusion that until 2004 intra-marital children were listed by the phenomenon of koseki‘ consciousness’ birth order (e.g. eldest son, second daughter), surfaces. whereas extra-marital children were listed with the characters for ‘man’ or ‘woman’ ( 男 女). The koseki’s role is more indirect in the private Today all children are listed by birth order to sphere, that is to say, in relation to the affective mitigate the discriminatory aspect of birth- relations between couples and in a symbiotic order listings. Koseki therefore renders mother–child relation, which encompasses illegitimacy legible for life: within thekoseki emotional and physical expressions. Affective because the names of the parents and the birth disrespect includes deprivation of love and order item are basic status identification items physical abuse. If inclusion and exclusion in the that follow a person from koseki to koseki, and legal and organizational spheres contribute to within society because koseki is used for formal our individuation, then the recognition and and informal identification purposes.

8 12 | 35 | 1 APJ | JF

With unmarried motherhood highlyWhile the rationale behind a state’s choice of disapproved of, extra marital children are one or the other or both principles may differ, avoided as it introduces stains of illegitimacy, their shared underlying principle, the idea of not only on the register of the mother and the citizenship as a birthright, remains the same child, but also on the parental register listing (Fletcher 2001: 5). Indeed, even the terms her parents and siblings. Usually daughters ‘nation’ and ‘nationality’ reflect the Latin word leave their parental koseki due to a marriage for birth (nacio). notification, but in case of unmarried motherhood, the koseki of her parents (and Early on, Aristotle, however, questioned the siblings) will reveal that she left that register suitability of birth as the basis for being a due to a birth notification – another indicator of citizen. Examining the city, the central question illegitimacy. The koseki system thus arguably was ‘whom we ought to call Citizen, and who is contributes to the low rate of extramarital one’ (Aristotle 1778: 112). Although the births. contemporary definition of the citizen was ‘one who is sprung from Citizens’ (Aristotle 1778: Pregnant women who are unable to marry tend 116), Aristotle noted that logically one cannot to resort to abortion, adoption, non-registration be born a citizen when the first of the family or even abandonment. While these may be seen cannot prove themselves to be a citizen. as common-sense dispositions given social Consequently, ‘as a mortar is made by a context, in Honnethian terms they represent mortar-maker, so a Citizen is made by a affective disrespect. If viewed as strategies to Citizen-maker’ (Aristotle 1778: 116). In other prevent incurring society’s disrespect (upon the words, citizenship is not innate; politicians mother herself, the child, or her parents and create citizens (Stevens 2012: A31).16 However, siblings), we see how the general koseki- given the koseki system, we here need to centered struggle for recognition can result in consider the agency of parents, since the emotional, organizational, and legal disrespect acquisition of Japanese citizenship for most toward the child itself (e.g. physicalinvolves a notification of birth. confinement to conceal its existence,14 the ability to marry, or to enjoy the right of The simple fact of birth only extends formal citizenship). membership in principle. The ‘Citizen-maker’ is the series of administrative processes that such On jus sanguinis and jus koseki a birth triggers. In any state, the apparatus that facilitates the conferral of individual Let us examine the termjus sanguinis. The citizenship is a complex interaction of legal scholar George P. Fletcher reminds us legislation and actors. In Japan conferral of that the English term ‘law’ has two distinct citizenship involves the interaction of the legal meanings. Law signifies the latin term lex, substantive Nationality Law with the which refers to ‘’ (law-as-enacted- procedural Household Registration Law law or law-as-power). Law can also invoke the (kosekihō, 戸籍法) and the KosekiEnforcement latin term jus, which is ‘law in a broader Regulations (Koseki shikō kisoku, 戸籍法施行 inclusive sense encompassing principles of 規則),17as well as actors such as parentsand justice’ (law-as-principle or law-as-reason).15 registrars. Under the Nationality Law a child Where lex is purely local, jus is not. The terms with Japanese parents is a Japanese national, jus soli and jus sanguinis, for example, reflect but for its registration as such, the ‘Citizen- the notion that citizenship acquiredmaker’ is the child’s parents who carry out the automatically at birth due to descent or place birth notification, and thekoseki registration of birth has an intrinsic appeal across states. procedures, which record the new citizen. At

9 12 | 35 | 1 APJ | JF the core of jus koseki as a nationality principle, individual rights it acquires by becoming then, is the birth notification and thekoseki registered. For existing registrants, who enjoy registration. Let us begin elaborating jus koseki these individual rights, it is also the ability to by looking at the koseki system that emerged control access to their particular register. between 1871 and 1898. Under jus koseki, then, the state allows the household to be ade facto gateway to In general, the pre-war koshu controlled the registered citizenship. positions in his household through the ‘right of the household head’ (koshu-ken 戸主権) which To further examine thekoseki ’s influence on was stipulated in the Civil Code. As mentioned, Japanese nationality, I will examine Edict 170 the koshu had to approve, and could thus deny, of 1871 which introduced the modernkoseki an extra-marital child’s entry into his register. system in 1871, Edict 103 of 1873 which Also marriages had to be approved by the stipulated nationality for foreigners who household head. The notification of a marriage married into Japanese households, and the was therefore not so much a question of a Nationality Laws of 1899 and 1950 which union of two individuals as it was a question of adhere to jus sanguinis. Finally, via cases of the household head deeming the ‘bride’ eligible unregistered children from the late 2000s, I to that status position within hisko unit will examine how and why the administrative (Fukushima 1959a: 67). The household head household can constitute a barrier to registered could deny and bestow those and other citizenship. household positions as he saw fit. Edict 170 of 1871: defining the original With the postwar abolition of the right of the nationals of Japan household head, the notification of status Between 1871 and 1899, legislation on the changes are today in the hands of the nationality of the Japanese was attended to in a individuals involved. Parents mind the quick, provisional and piecemeal manner. The notifications pertaining to themselves and their entire population of Japan became Japanese minor children, and their adult sons and nationals simply based on being residents, daughters are free to submit notifications of whereas the nationality of foreigners who marriage, birth, adoption, etc. The notification joined, married or were adopted into Japanese of birth is mandatory, but as we will see below, households was determined by positive law parents appear to have de facto autonomy in (Tashiro 1974: 54–56). Edict 170 nationalized terms of the power to deny a child a registered the former and Edict 103 extended nationality household position by not submitting a birth to the latter. notification. Whether for personal reasons or for the sake of the household, this non- Edict 17018 was not a nationality law, yet the notification jeopardizes the child’s right to preamble indicated that those who were citizenship. Similar to the pre-war koshu, then, registered were nationals (kokumin). This edict koseki registrants today can control theand the nationwide koseki compilation process household positions of incoming members. it ordered to take place during 1872 thus constitute Japan’s initial ‘Citizen-maker’. As the The bestowal and denial of household positions object of registration was everyone living has thus since early Meiji reflected an on-going, within the territories of Japan,19 the basis for three-tiered struggle for recognition. The this initial conferral of nationality was ‘principle’ or ‘reason’ of jus koseki is, at this therefore essentially residence. point, the right that derives from registered household membership. For a child, it is the According to Tashiro Aritsugu,20 Edict 170

10 12 | 35 | 1 APJ | JF brought early modern membership criteria into system which originated in the Edo period’s the modern period. Tashiro (1974), entitled An system of oral notification (Ishii 1981: 44). Article by Article Commentary on theEdict 170 also introduced a new official called Nationality Law, is the authoritative volume on the kochō (household chief, 戸長), who was Japanese Nationality Law. He explains that charged with compiling the koseki registers. A membership in early modern Japan waskochō was to be appointed in each village and governed by certain unwritten legal principles ward, and he, in turn, relied on the heads of centered on the idea that residents and each village household to prepare and submit nationals were identical jūsho=kokuseki( the required data.21 After the initial compilation (jūmin=kokumin) dōitsushisō, 住所＝国籍（住 of koseki, the household heads would submit 民＝国民）同一思想). Residence jūsho( ) was written notifications (e.g. birth notifications) to nationality kokuseki( ), and residentsthe kochō so as to update the registers. (jūmin)were nationals kokumin( ) (Tashiro According to Toshitani, this marks the 1974:55). In other words, this initial nationality beginnings of the authority of the household principle appears to be a type of jus domicilis. head (koshuken, 戸主権) (Toshitani 1987a: 50–51). Echoing Aristotle, Tashiro notes that thejus sanguinis of the 1889 Nationality Law cannot By relying on thekoshu to manage his specify who the ‘original Japanese nationals’ household and supply accurate information, the (ganso nihonjin元祖日本人) were. According to state in effect installed an official in every Tashiro, the original Japanese that existed household. These household heads were, immediately prior to the enforcement of the however, apt to alter household data to serve 1899 Nationality Law were those who were the interests of their households (Fukushima nationals prior to its enforcement and they 1959a: 49). The koshu’s authority to report the emerged from the residents-as-nationals idea conditions of his particular household also (Tashiro 1974: 53–54). In other words, the enabled him to evade state authority. With original Japanese prior to 1899 were the koseki Edict 170, marriage and adoption became registrants. administrative events and family hierarchies and relations transformed into administrative In the Edo period, the smallest unit ofkoseki positions. Holders of the administrative registration was the village. Residencepositions of ‘household head’ and ‘eldest son’ constituted membership of a village and this were exempt from military service in early was certified via household registration. ThisMeiji and such positions were easily created registration differentiated between status through notifications – especially if the local groups and, because movement between these kochō looked the other way. The aim of the groups was all but impossible, group status notification system was to facilitate collection membership was in effect acquired at birth. of objective data on the actual status relations Residence was not a birthright, though, given of the , yet this very system the punishment of deregistration (Morialso enabled individual households to advance 2014:65-73). Similarly, nationality has, after household interests (Toshitani 1987b: 146–47). Edict 170’s initial nationwide compilation of koseki registers, also in effect been acquired at Edict 103 of 1873: the family system and birth, as the birth of every new-born is in nationality principle to be recorded, making them registered household members. It was also necessary to define Japanese nationality in terms of foreigners who married Edict 170 introduced a written notificationor were adopted into Japanese families, but the

11 12 | 35 | 1 APJ | JF residence-as-nationality principle was not nationality of the child shall also follow that of applied to foreigners who took up residency the parents. This, in turn, is where Tashiro sees (Tashiro 1974:55–56, 58). Stipulatingthe first stirrings of the later selection of the acquisition and loss of nationality in terms of principle of jus sanguinis over jus soli. Tashiro marriage and adoption involving a foreigner also notes that the basis for nationality at this and a Japanese national, Edict 103 of 1873 is stage is bifurcated: the residence-as-nationality the first example of a preliminary positive law idea underlies the nationality of the general on nationality (Tashiro 1974:Japanese population, whereas for resident 58–59).22Legislation on the nationality of the foreigners nationality has become an Japanese as such did not appear until Japan’s administrative civil status event. For this 1899 Nationality Law. reason, Edict 103 can be interpreted as a kind of policy (Tashiro 1974: 59–60). Kidana Shōichi (2003) sums up Edict 103’s three main points.First, it represented strict In terms of the nationality of women who marry control over nationality as marriages between a foreign nationals, Edict 103 is clearly in foreigner and a Japanese national required the harmony with the prevalent European state’s approval (art. 1), but also a softlegislation. Yet, as Kamoto notes, this edict is approach to nationality as it permitted change an anomaly in the context of contemporary of nationality as a result of marriage. Second, western nationality law, as it stipulates the like other early Meiji legislation, Edict 103 acquisition of citizenship by a foreigner who enters a Japanese household as a mukoyōshi, or adopted French law; in this case the French adoptive son-in-law (art. 6) (Kamoto Code Civil’s principle of same conjugal 2014:84-85). citizenship under which female spouses automatically acquire citizenship of the Tashiro’s discussion of Edict 103 focuses on its husband. Third, it paid particular attention to Western jus sanguinis aspects. I think, the Japanese family system by including however, it is important also to consider Edict stipulations on adoptive sons-in-law, the so- 103 in light of the Japanese family system’s (婿養子 called mukoyōshi ) (Kidana 2003: 27). traditions of mukoyōshi and yome (嫁). Let us first look at the stipulations on marriage. Mukoyōshi refers to the adoption of a male by a Edict 103 stipulated that marriages between household head and hiswife who lack a male foreigners and Japanese nationals entailed the heir to continue the family or house (ie) line. acquisition of Japanese citizenship for foreign Upon adoption, the male adoptee will at some women marrying Japanese men (art. 3) and the point marry a daughter of the house and loss of Japanese nationality for Japanese eventually succeed to the position of household women who married foreign men (art. 2). In head. As such, themukoyōshi tradition this, Edict 103 was consistent with therepresents a cornerstone in the Japanese family prevalent principle in contemporary Europe as system. Another entrenched aspect of the seen in the Code Civil where spouses share the family system is that the bride yome( ) upon same nationality (i.e. the nationality of the marriage typically enters the household of the husband). husband.

Edict 103 did not address the citizenship of When a mukoyōshi or a yome enters a house, children that spring from such marriages, yet he or she will partake in the collective Tashiro (1974) argues that since the edict identifiers of the house. Under Edict 170 these follows the principle of conjugal couples collective administrative data items included sharing nationality it is implied that the the name of the shrine of which they are

12 12 | 35 | 1 APJ | JF parishioners (ujiko, 氏子) and their shared the revised Civil Code and Koseki Law of 1947 ‘family class’ (zokushō, 族称), an entry that emerged, replacing the institutional ie‘ ’ with today is erased in all pre-war registers to the two-generational conjugal unit,24 and the protect the privacy of the buraku population.23 koshu with the first registrant or hittōsha–the Edict 170 also introduced the collectiveperson whose surname ischosen to index the identifier of ‘Japanese nationality’ and from this conjugal ko unit (see also footnote 12). perspective, Edict 103 merely states that foreigners who enter a ko unit as a bride or as Alfred C. Oppler, who was the SCAP’s authority an adoptive son-in-law shall, like every existing on the postwar legal reforms, found that the koseki registrant, share the common signifier of 1899 Nationality Law represented the ‘attitude Japanese nationality. engendered by the house system and the resulting superiority of the male’ (Oppler 1976: In this sense, Edict 103 appears to have been 152). To secure the right to choose one’s designed to work with the two nationality citizenship, the superior position of the male schemata that the early Meiji state was was abolished and as a result the citizenship of primarily concerned with: the koseki register and (adoptive) children ceased to follow and the French Code Civil. Functional with the that of the husband or (adoptive) father (Oppler Western system of nationality law, Edict 103 1976: 152–53).25 The abolition of the family satisfies positive law and Japan’s existing system element meant, however, that foreign family system. Edict 103 was able to reflect the spouses today cannot be listed in the koseki of European principle that conjugal couples share their Japanese spouse and children unless they the same nationality without conflicting with go through the process of naturalization. the new koseki-based order laid down by Edict 170, which now administratively structured this The principle of naturalization through family system. marriage and adoption also facilitated transfer between the two-tiered naichi (内地)and gaichi The principles within Edict 103, which (外地) Japanese that emerged in essentially regulated changes in nationality the colonial period. The colonialkoseki thus status through Japan’s existing marriage and resembled the Japanese family model, but also adoption practices, were incorporated represented an expansion of the ‘residence as practically unaltered in the later 1899 Nationality Law, article 5 (Kashiwazaki 1998a: nationality’ principle through the two-tiered 286). They were, however, abolished with the naichi and gaichi honseki system. 1950 Nationality Law. Honseki is today a central koseki index, but The Government Section (GS) of the Supreme from 1871 to 1898, koseki documents were Commander for the Allied Powers (SCAP) indexed by address (and by the full name of the sought through legal reforms to implement the koshu). With the 1898 Koseki Law the address intent of the postwar in terms of index changed to the conceptual honseki index securing the dignity of the individual. The GS’s which specifies an administrative subdivision of view on the koseki system was as follows: the territories of Japan. Fundamentally ‘Implementation of the new Constitution and indicating the jurisdiction where thekoseki Civil Code of Japan necessitated the removal of document in question is managed and stored, 26 all objectionable power, influence, obligations, the honseki is not an address, as only koseki and feudalistic ramifications of the long-registrants possess an administrative honseki established house Koseki( ) system’ location.27 Hence the Koseki Laws’ nationality- (Government Section 1949: 217). As a result, related focus on honseki and koseki entry.

13 12 | 35 | 1 APJ | JF

Japanese nationals, then, ‘reside’ within a under colonialism mirrors the principles rarefied, virtual realm of Japanese territory that underlying nationality discussed earlier: The is only accessible through administrative koseki gaichihonseki provided agaichi Japanese registration: an administrative territory of nationality. Simple marriage and adoption Japan that comprises the totality ofhonseki facilitated movement between naichi and gaichi areas (Krogness 2004: 44; Krogness 2008: registers, producingnaichi orgaichi 222), and which are accessed throughnationalities depending on the honseki of the notifications of birth, marriage, and adoption. ko unit one entered. Within this logic, Japan’s We might say that the principle of residence-as- post-defeat loss of the gaichi territories would nationality becamehonseki -residence-as- mean the loss of gaichi nationality because its nationality. For example, ahonseki on a gaichihonseki basis vanished (Krogness 2004: driver’s license reveals that the holder is a 54–61; Krogness 2008: 225).28 At a stroke, Japanese national. Japan’s colonial citizens lost Japanese citizenship, including those from Korea and Taiwan living in Japan

The nationality of 1899: Koseki and Jus Sanguinis

The jus sanguinis principle for nationality bestowal is found in the 1899 Nationality Law, article 1, and the 1950 Nationality Law, article 2, which stipulate that a child is a Japanese citizen if: 1) the father or the mother is a citizen at the time of the birth, or 2) the father of the child died prior to the birth and was a citizen at the time of death. To understand concretely the registration of children who 4. An example of emotional attachment to fulfill thejus sanguinis principle, we shall the honseki location. A photo of Shína consult the koseki encyclopaedia. Ringo and her band Jihen at Shinjuku Tower Records with a dedication The notification of birth to her fans which begins: “Hello, my honseki area” (Hello, 私の本籍地!). By Kōzuma and Tashiro (2001) specify that the ‘honseki area’, she most likely means registration of a newborn as a citizen occurs where she belongs emotionally (e.g.with the notification of its birth as it constitutes ‘hometown’), rather than the actualthe initial record and documentation of honseki of her koseki, which could well be individual legal rights, including the right of elsewhere. Born in Saitama and raised in citizenship. The koseki document constitutes Fukuoka, she calls herself ”a descendant of official proof of citizenship and it is generally Shinjuku who performs in my own drama. presumed that individuals whose births have been notified are citizens, but this does not mean that individuals registered inkoseki The honseki residence as nationality principle necessarily are citizens and that those may thus inform our understanding of the individuals who are not registered are not differentiated along naichi/gaichi citizens. It can happen that a non-citizen is lines that emerged in the colonial era (see also koseki registered and that a citizen lacks koseki Chapman 2014 and Kamoto 2014). Nationality registration (Kōzuma and Tashiro 2001:266).

14 12 | 35 | 1 APJ | JF

False koseki registration of non-citizens is required (Kidana 2003: 56–58). possible because koseki registrations are based on notifications and thekoseki official only In sum, koseki merely records and documents checks the contents of a notification formally in citizenship, yet it can effectively access terms of the form being filled out correctly. The citizenship, too. The encyclopaedia casts some examination of the birth notification does notlight on this contradiction by highlighting this extend to checking whether or not the person interesting dichotomy between the roles of the in question fulfills the Nationality Law’sNationality Law’s jus sanguinis and the koseki requirements for citizenship acquisition or loss. system. As a record of citizens, the koseki’s role Failure to make a birth notification, on thedepends on the Nationality Law since the other hand, means that not all citizens are registrations must be based on the principle jus registered in koseki. The koseki system has sanguinis. Here kokuseki constitutes the basis numerous safeguards to assure that kokuseki (moto 本) and koseki merely the result (sue and the koseki are congruent, but in reality 末). However, to ascertain the Japanese incongruities do occur (Kōzuma and Tashiro citizenship of the parent(s) of a newborn, the 2001: 132–33). In sum, thekoseki is unlikely Nationality Law’s principle ofjus sanguinis actually to register all births that fulfill thedepends on confirmation by way of theirkoseki stipulated jus sanguinis principle, and only registrations. In this case, ‘kokuseki’ depends such births. on ‘koseki’– here koseki is ‘primary’ and kokuseki is ‘secondary.’ In terms of substantive Mere koseki registration, moreover, does not law kokuseki is the basis, yet in terms of have the effect of conferring citizenshipprocedural law thekoseki precedes as because citizenship is determined by the ‘primary’ (Kōzuma and Tashiro 2001: 27). Nationality Law (Kōzuma and Tashiro 2001: 266), yet the encyclopaedia also stresses the To illustrate howkoseki notifications give the importance of preventing thekoseki koseki a primary role over kokuseki and how registration of non-citizens. If suchthe struggle of recognition can lead to non- notification of births, let us look at some cases counterfactual koseki registrations remain from 2007 and 2008. undiscovered for a long period of time, there will be a point where they have to be Mukosekisha and nationality considered factual (Kōzuma and Tashiro 2001: 26–27). While the koseki just infers Japanese From late 2006, there emerged a spate of news citizenship, after a certain number of years reports on children who had never been koseki they become ‘old koseki’ (古い戸籍) that registered, despite being citizens under the jus confirm Japanese citizenship. Old koseki are in sanguinis principle. These cases of principle koseki that are more than three mukosekisha (無戸籍者) shed important light generations old, at which point they must be on the koseki system’s role vis-à-vis citizenship. considered documentation confirming Japanese citizenship. The term ‘old koseki’, though, does In late 2006 a 16-year-old high school student not signify a specific age. Rather, the termapplied for a in preparation for a 2007 signifies ‘koseki where the basis for disproval school trip. Her application was turned down of citizenship has perished’ (Tashiro 1974: 13). on 16 January because it did not include a In general, however, the koseki is nothing more koseki shōhon as proof of citizenship. She was than preliminary documentation of acquisition unable to supply the requiredkoseki copy or loss of Japanese citizenship. Separate because her mother had never registered her individual and concrete proof of the conditions birth. A victim of domestic violence and unable for such acquisition or loss may also be to secure a divorce, the mother had fled her

15 12 | 35 | 1 APJ | JF former husband with the help of a man with (mukoseki nisei, 無戸籍二世). The mother was, whom she thereafter had a child – the high as un-koseki registered, unable to submit a school student in question. The following year, birth notification and had, incidentally, for that the mother got divorced, but the birth of the same reason also been unable to submit a daughter fell under Article 722 of the Civil marriage notification the previous summer. Code, which stipulates that the former husband This unregistered mother’s lack ofkoseki is the legal father of a child who is born within registration was also due to the 300 days of a divorce. As a result, thekoseki abovementioned ‘300-day rule’ and domestic officials did not accept the birth notification,violence. Her mother (aged 50) had refrained which specified the surname of the mother’sfrom making a birth notification for fear of male partner. When the high school student alerting her former husband of her applied for the passport in late 2006, she, her whereabouts (mainichi.jp 2008). parents and a support group29 attempted to submit to the passport office the documentsInterestingly, on 11 June 2008 the Ministry of necessary to make akoseki registration, Justice allowed the 27-year-old’s child to be including the hospital-issued birth certificate. registered in the koseki ‘in consideration of his These documents were not accepted. The future’. The ministry did not, however, take representative of the support group stated that steps to resolve his mother’s unregistered it was unreasonable that the circumstances of status (asahi. com 2008a, 2008b). the mother should limit the daughter’s human rights and her right to go overseas (Mainichi An administrative change addressing the Shinbun 2006; asahi.com 2007a, 2007b). mukoseki issue occurred with the revision in June 2007 of the Passport Law Enforcement The leading scholar on koseki and family law Regulations. This led the Foreign Ministry Ninomiya Shūhei has pointedout that the (Gaimushō, 外務省)to issue for the first time on central problem in the above case was the 2 September 2008passports to twomukoseki koseki’s role as proof of citizenship: ‘The koseki persons: a woman (aged 24) from is just a means to document one’s citizenship Prefecture and a boy (aged 1) from Tokyo. Both and family relations, so to make the koseki an were unregistered due to article 722 of the absolute requirement [for getting a passport] is Civil Code. The revision facilitated issuing to put the cart before the horse’ (Mainichi passports to mukoseki persons if they meet Shinbun 2006). In other words, this case certain conditions, among these that ‘a true exemplifies the aforementioned contradictions parent–child relationship has been or is being that exist between the jus sanguinis and the established through due procedures in a court koseki in terms of their relative primacy in of law’ (Daily Yomiuri Online 2008; Yomiuri relation to bestowal of nationality. Not only is Online 2008). the koseki system inadequate for securing the registration of all citizens, but the stateIn other words, this revision of Passport Law administration appears to prioritise the koseki Enforcement Regulations stresses the need to register over the hospital-issued birthprove that the individuals in question fulfill the certificate which should be the most suitablenationality principle ofjus sanguinis. This proof in terms ofjus sanguinis. contrasts greatly with the state’s laissez-faire approach to the generalkoseki -based Another case was reported on 20 May 2008 by registration of citizens, which neither actively mainichi.jp. A 27-year-old mukosekisha gave ensures that all children of Japanese parentage birth to a child who as a consequence became a are registered as citizens, nor appears very ‘second-generation un-koseki registered’ interested in helping individuals who lack

16 12 | 35 | 1 APJ | JF koseki registration. In short, the state seems General and specific aspects of jus koseki fundamentally content with leaving the matter of koseki registration – even citizenship – in the The general aspects ofjus koseki – which hands of each individual family. The case of the influences Japanese society beyond the Japanese orphans and women who were left question of legal citizenship – are the following behind in China (zanryū koji/fujin, 残留孤児・ four basic principles of koseki registration: 婦人), whose reacquisition of Japanese citizenship in the early nineteen eighties was 1. Scope of registration: the citizens of left in the hands of their Japanese families, Japan. provides a similar example (see also Tong and 2. The unit of registration: the Asano 2014). A central proposition of Krogness administrative household. Every (2004), which studies thezanryū koji/fujin household member shares the same inrelation to the koseki, is that it is but an koseki for individual documentation example of how the Japanese state relies on the purposes. The data on one person koseki system to ensure a family-level reflects on each member and the entire integration of citizens, so as to maintain a household. desired order of mutual surveillance and 3. The registration of data: it is the duty of obligation (Krogness 2004: 70–71), which goes the administrative household itself to back to the ancient registers of China, Korea notify the all individual civil status and Japan and is the fundamental feature of jus changes and events to koseki office. Each koseki. household member submits notifications that pertain to themselves (e.g. the These cases illustrate that citizenship is not parent notifies the birth of his or her necessarily among a mother’s primary motives child, the adopting parent notifies the for notifying a birth. Here the primary motives adoption of a child, and the couple in are informed by the struggle to achieve question notifies their marriage or recognition and avoid disrespect. These cases divorce). The koseki office accepts reveal state disrespect of individual rights correctly filled-out notification, but does expressed in the denial of passport due to lack not verify the basis for the status change. of koseki copy, in the refusal to accept birth 4. Access to registered data: as the koseki certificates listing the biological father (due to serves as Japan’s system for Article 722), in helping the child but not his documenting the individual, the koseki mother to achieve koseki registration, in not registers remain in principle publicly permitting an un-koseki registered woman to accessible. The koseki office provides, for enter into legal marriage, and, surely, in a fee, full or partial copies of koseki upon forcing a former husband to have another request. (Access to koseki copies have man’s child listed in his koseki as his own (due only very gradually been limited, to Article 722). Further, there is the crucial beginning in the late 1960s. Not until struggle of the mothers to avoid the physical 2008 did it become required for disrespect that their husbands have inflicted everyone, including the person in through domestic violence. Fundamentally, question, to show ID when requesting a these cases show that these mothers’ non- koseki copy at the municipal koseki registration of their children disrespects these offices.) children’s individual rights, but their disrespect is a collateral result of their more keenly felt The koseki is quite different from the individual need to evade the disrespect of domestic civil status registers in most Western states, violence and Article 722. which tend to register all legal residents

17 12 | 35 | 1 APJ | JF regardless of nationality by the unit of the Nationality Law. The principle of jus koseki is individual, largely collect data via state and therefore proposed here to account more public institutions, and in principle treats that precisely for the character of Japanese private data as inaccessible to third parties. nationality.

In general, the above four principles makes One aspect of jus koseki is that the koseki koseki registrants identify the unit with the system fundamentally documents nationality koseki as family and legal citizenship, that one after the principle of residence-as-membership, member’s data reflects on the entire household which was also central for determining unit, that the data is potentially accessible to membership in the Edo period. From the the surrounding society, and that data that perspective of residence-as-nationality, enters one’s koseki should be carefully curated. documentation of nationality was thus in early Meiji centered in the household address More specifically in terms of Japanese legal designated in the koseki document that one citizenship, jus koseki is not that conducive to was registered in. From 1898, documentation jus sanguinis and has more affinity withjus of nationality became centered on the domicilis. Jus koseki utilizes the koseki as administrative honseki location that today documentation for citizenship, which requires indexes each koseki document. Jus koseki is the bestowal of a household position. Such a thus a type of jus domicilis where residence position is fundamentally granted subjectively requires registered membership of the because parents are mainly concerned with administrative household, or ko unit and is family formation - not citizenship. Further, this denoted by honseki. subjective allocation of registered household membership is facilitated by the four basic Another aspect of jus koseki is that the state via koseki principles. Finally, under jus koseki the the koseki system delegates the official right to citizenship is not secured adequately registration of citizens to the households. This due to the state’s principled reluctance to occurs because a child, who is a citizen under interfere with jus sanguinis, is registered as such via its household dispositions, and the koseki’s parents’ notification of its birth. However, this systemic failure to enforce reliance on birth notifications fails to safeguard birth notifications. the child’s right to be registered as a citizen. In Jus koseki’s influence extends beyond the part, this is because the primary motive for the question of birth and citizenship to other life parents’ notification of a birth is not citizenship events, such as marriage, divorce, adoption, registration but rather the establishment of dissolution of adoption, legal gender change, parent–child relations. But more fundamentally, illegitimacy, surname, locale (due to honseki), children’s rights to citizenship is inadequately as well as population groups, such as the protected, partly because of systemic unregistered, foreign residents, minorities, inadequacies in the koseki system and partly gender relations, etc. because of the state’s apparent reluctance to interfere with household-levelkoseki Conclusion dispositions.

As a ledger of the citizens of Japan, the koseki The Japanese state’s disinclination to interfere has significantly influenced Japanesein koseki registration matters, and the koseki nationality from 1872 until today. In this role system’s de facto reliance on trust in terms of the koseki system discreetly envelops, as it birth notification submissions, can be were, the jus sanguinis principle of the interpreted as a remnant of the Meiji-era

18 12 | 35 | 1 APJ | JF control of the population through the authority Orphans’ (Chūgoku zanryū hōjin) to Japan. This of the household head (whomkoseki article draws on and adapts material from Karl researchers in the 1950’s likened to a family Jakob Krogness and David Chapman, eds., level state bureaucrat). Registration within the Japan’s Household Registration System and koseki system documents fundamentalCitizenship: Koseki, ficationIdenti and individual rights, but given this system’s Documentation, London: Routledge, 2014. E- laissez-faire character, the state appears to mail prioritize the household unit thekoseki produces over securing the rights of its Recommended citation: Karl Jakob Krogness, registered individuals. "Jus Koseki: Household registration and Japanese citizenship," The Asia-Pacific Journal, Looking beyond nationality specifically,Vol. I 12, Issue 35, No. 1, September 1, 2014. propose that jus koseki is fundamentally an ordering principle wherein a larger social order References emanates from a generally accepted administrative micro-level ordering of the Aristotle (1778) A Treatise on Government, population into administrative household units. London: T. Payne, B. White, and T. Cadell. Largely responsible for their own registrations asahi.com (2007a) ‘Ken, ryoken shinsei fujūri o and with minimal state interference, family kettei’ [Prefecture decides not to accept groups and individuals engage in a struggle for passport application], asahi.com, 17 January. legal, social, and emotional recognition as they (accessed 24 January 2007). strive to configure the family they envision within the parameters of the given——(2007b) ‘Mukokuseki kō 1 e ryoken horyū’ administrative ko unit matrix. [Passport withheld from first-year highschool student without citizenship], asahi.com, 5 Deeply influential at the level of the state, the January. (accessed 24 January 2007). family, and the individual, jus koseki should be further articulated so that we can better ——(2008a) ‘“Mukoseki nisei” kashō ni grapple with ‘koseki Japan.’ michisuji, hahaoya ha izen mukoseki’[‘Second generation un-koseki registereds’ on way to Karl Jakob Krogness is an affiliated solution, mother un-registered as before], researcher at the Nordic Institute of Asian asahi.com, 11 June. (accessed 13 July 2008). Studies, University of Copenhagen. His PhD dissertation (University of Copenhagen) is the ——(2008b) ‘Mukoseki no haha, ko futari mo first thorough study of the modernkoseki ’s mukoseki: “rensa tomete” kuni ni uttae’ history and development, structure and[Mother unregistered, child also unregistered, function, and its social role within modern lawsuit against the state: ‘stop the chain Japanese society. Subsequent research has reaction’], asahi.com, 2 June. (accessed 4 June examined the individual, the family, and the 2008). population along koseki lines. Future research interests include comparative studies of the Bachnik, J. M. (1983) ‘Recruitment Strategies household registration systems of thefor Household Succession: Rethinking Japanese neighboring East Asian states. Other research Household Organization’, Man, 1(1): 160–82. interests are the civilian colonization policies regarding Manchukuo (e.g. the Giyūtai/Youth Chapman, D. (2014) ‘Managing “strangers” and Corps), as well as the policies that shaped the “undecidables”: Population registration in Meiji return migration of China of the Japanese ‘War Japan’, in D. Chapman and K. J. Krogness (eds),

19 12 | 35 | 1 APJ | JF

Japan’s Household Registration System and Kanematsu, S., M. Fukushima, et al. (1989) Citizenship: Koseki, fiIdentication andShōnen jiken wo kangaeru: ‘onna, kodomo’ no Documentation, London: Routledge. shiten kara [On juvenile delinquency: from the perspective of ‘women, children’], Tokyo: Asahi Daily Yomiuri Online (2008) ‘2 not on family Shinbunsha. registers get passports’, Daily Yomiuri Online, 3 September. Kashiwazaki, C. (1998a) ‘“Jus sanguinis” in Japan: the origin of citizenship in a comparative Fahrmeir, A. (2007) Citizenship: The Rise and perspective’, International Journal of Fall of a Modern Concept, New Haven, CT: Yale Comparative Sociology, 39(3): 278–300. University Press. ——(1998b) Nationality and Citizenship in Fletcher, G.P. (2001) In Honour of ‘Ius’ et ‘Lex’: Japan: Stability and Change in Comparative Some Thoughts on Speaking about Law, Perspective, PhD thesis, Brown University. Warszawa: ‘Ius et Lex’ Foundation. Kawashima, T. (1948)Nihonshakai no Fukushima, M. (1959a) ‘Ie’ seido no kenkyū. kazokuteki kōsei [The Familistic Structure Shiryōhen 1 [‘Ie’ System Research:ofJapanese Society], Tokyo: Gakusei Shobō. Historiography 1], Tokyo: Tōkyō Daigaku Shuppankai. Kidana, S. (2003) Kokuseki Hō [Nationality Law: With Item-by-Item Annotations], Tokyo: ——(1959b) ‘Meiji yonen kosekihō no shiteki Nihon Kajō Shuppan. zentei to sono kōzō, in M. Fukushima(ed.) Koseki seido to ‘ie’ seido: ‘ie’ seido no kenkyū, Kōseirōdōshō. (2006) ‘ 17 nendo Tokyo: Tōkyō Daigaku Shuppankai. “shusshō ni kansuru tōkei” no gaikyō’ [Generalconditions for FY 2005 relating to Government Section (1949)Political ‘statistics on birth’], retrieved 2 January, 2009, Reorientation of Japan, September 1945 to from 3–8. September 1948: Report of Government Section, Supreme Commander for the Allied Kōzuma, A. and Tashiro, A. (eds) (2001) Taikei Powers, Washington, DC: Government Section, koseki yōgo jiten: hōrei, shinzoku,koseki Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers. jitsumu, sōzoku, kyūhō[Systematic Encyclopaedia of Koseki Terminology: Statutes, Honneth, A. (1998) Kampf um Anerkennung: Relations, Koseki Affairs, Succession, Former Zur moralischen Grammatik sozialer Konflikte Laws], Tokyo: Nihon Kajo Shuppan Kabushiki [The Struggle for Recognition: The Moral Kaisha. Grammar of Social Conflicts], Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp Verlag. Krogness, K.J. (2004) We are Family: Chūgoku Kikokusha, Koseki Registration and the Ishii, R. (1981) Ie to koseki no rekishi [The Japanese Population Control System, MA History of Ie and Koseki], Tokyo: Sōbunsha. thesis, Københavns Universitet.

Kamoto, I. (2014) ‘Creating spatial hierarchies: ——(2008) The Koseki System and ‘Koseki The Koseki, early international marriage and Consciousness’: An Exploration of the intermarriage’, in D. Chapman and K. J. Development and Functions of the Modern Krogness (eds), Japan’s Household Registration Japanese Household Registration System and System and Citizenship: Koseki, Identification How it flInuences Social Life, PhD thesis, and Documentation, London: Routledge. Københavns Universitet.

20 12 | 35 | 1 APJ | JF

——(2011) ‘The ideal, the deficient, and theOppler, A.C. (1976) Legal Reform in Occupied illogical family: an initial typologyJapan: A Participant Looks Back, Princeton, NJ: ofadministrative household units’, in A. Alexy Princeton University Press. and R. Ronald (eds) Home and Family in Japan: Continuity and Transformation, London: Shinmi, K. (1959) Jinshin koseki seiritsu ni Routledge. kansuru kenkyū [A study on the formation of the jinshin koseki ], Tokyo: Nihon Gakujutsu ——(2013) ‘What do you think the household Shinkō kai. register is? Perceptions of koseki relating to social order and individual rights in 1950s and Stevens, J. (2012) ‘Citizenship to go’, The New 2000s Japan’, in I. About, J. Brown and G. York Times, 17 May, p. A31. (accessed 4 July Lonergan (eds) Identification and Registration 2013). Practices in Transnational Perspective: People, Tashiro, A. (1974) Kokuseki hō chikujō kaisetsu Papers and Practices, New York: Palgrave [An Article by Article Commentary on the Macmillan. Nationality Law], Tokyo: Nihon Kajo Shuppansha. Mainichi Shinbun (2006) ‘Henshū kisha kara: ryoken torenu “nihonjin”’ [From the editor: Tomson, E. (1971)Das ‘Japanese’ who cannot get passports], Mainichi Staatsangehörigkeitsrecht der ostasiatischen Shinbun, 27 November 2006. (accessed 28 Staaten: China, Japan, Korea, Mongolei, January 2007). Frankfurt am Main: Alfred Metzner Verlag. mainichi.jp (2008) Gov’t‘ turns back on Toshitani, N. (1987a) ‘Jinshin koseki no hensei: pregnant woman with no family register Yamaguchi-ken no baai’ [The compilation of records due to divorce law’, 20 May. (accessed Jinshin koseki: the case of Yamaguchi-ken], 14 June 2008). Shakai Kagaku Kenkyū (Oishi Kaichirō kyōju kannen kinen gō), 39(4): 31–60. Mori, K. (2014) ‘The development of the modern Koseki ’, in D. Chapman and K. J. ——(1987b) to kokka: kazoku o ugokasu Krogness (eds), Japan’s Household Registration hō seisaku shisō [The Family and theState: System and Citizenship: Koseki, Identification Laws, Policies and Ideas that Influence the and Documentation, London: Routledge. Family], Tokyo: Chikuma Shobō.

Mukai, K. and N. Toshitani (1967) ‘The——(1991). ‘Kazoku hō no jikken’ [An Progress and Problems of Compiling the Civil inspection of the family law],Shiriizu henbō Code in the Early Meiji Era’, Law in Japan, 1: surukazoku 1, C. Ueno, Tokyo, Iwanami, 1: 25–59. 97–118.

Ninomiya, S. (1999) Koseki to jinken [Koseki United Nations Statistical Division (1998) and human rights]. Osaka: Buraku Kaihō/Jinken Handbook on Civil Registration and Vital Kenkyūsho. Statistics Systems: Preparation of a Legal Framework, New York: United Nations. Ninomiya, S. (2014) ‘TheKoseki and legal (accessed 4 July 2013). gender change’, in D. Chapman and K. J. Krogness (eds), Japan’s Household Registration Willig, R. (2003). “Introduktion” [Introduction], System and Citizenship: Koseki, Identification in A. Honneth, Behovet for Anerkendelse: En and Documentation, London: Routledge. Tekstsamling [The need for recognition: an

21 12 | 35 | 1 APJ | JF anthology], Copenhagen: Hans Reitzel, 7–23. needed for legal, administrative, statistical or any other purposes. Civil registration Yamanushi, M. (1962) ‘Kazoku hō to koseki sometimes plays a role in the creation of ishiki: “koseki” ishiki no takakuteki sokumen’, certain civil status records, a case in point in Nihon Daigaku Hō gakukai, Minpōgaku no being civil marriage ceremonies. Aggregate shomondai, Tokyo: Nihon Daigaku Hō gakukai. civil registration data produce continuous vital statistics’ (United Nations Statistical Division Yomiuri Online (2008) ‘Mukoseki no 2 nin ni 1998: 9). ryoken hakkyū, Gaimushō ga kisoku kaiseigo de hatsu no kettei’, Yomiuri Online, 3 September. 5 [ … ] kokumin no soto taru ni chikashi. […] 国民ノ外タルニ近シ Notes 6 The 1914 Koseki Law’s corresponding article 1 The idea of jus koseki stems from Krogness 44 is practically identical. (2004), which examines the crucial role the koseki and honseki had in relation to the 7 Interview conducted withkoseki registrar zanryū koji’s reacquisition of Japanese Satō Ken'ichi of the Matsuyama City Hall’s Civil citizenship. Division (shiminka), 13 September 2005. (Pseudonym used for privacy reasons.) 2 1871 Koseki Law, preamble, art. 1 (Dajōkan Edict No. 170 of 4 April); 1898 Koseki Law, art. 8 Interview conducted with the chief clerk of 170.2 (Law No. 12 of 15 June); 1914Koseki koseki registration, Nakano Akio, 12 December Law, art. 44 (Law No. 26 of 30 March); 1947 2006. (current) Koseki Law, art. 6, 18, 22 (Law No. 224 of 22 December). 9 The majority of household heads were male, but that position was open for females, too. 3 The koseki serves domestic purposes (see Female household heads are referred to as Kamoto 2014), and for this reason the so-called onna koshu (女戸主). citizen certificatekokuseki ( shōmeishō) is issued to document Japanese citizenship 10 For more on the phenomenon ofkoseki outside of Japan. Issuance of this certificateconsciousness, see Kawashima (1948), requires, however, a copy of one’skoseki as Yamanushi (1962), Toshitani (1987b) and proof of citizenship (Tashiro 1974: 14–15). Krogness (2013). Ninomiya (2014) also discusses this phenomenon using the term 4 The United Nations Statistical Division defines ‘koseki feelings’. civil registration in this way: ‘Civil registration is a state-run public institution that serves both 11 Individuation refers to the ontogeneric general and individual interests by gathering, development of becoming an individual. screening, documenting, filing, safekeeping, correcting, updating and certifying with 12 Marriage notification requires that the couple respect to the occurrence of vital events and choose one of their surnames as their shared their characteristics as they relate to the civil conjugal surname, which will index their koseki status of individuals and as they affect them register. The person whose surname is chosen and their families, and by providing the official, is listed first and hence becomes the ‘first permanent record of their existence, identity, registrant’. Couples are free to choose between and personal and family circumstances. Its the surnames of the husband and wife. purpose is therefore to store, preserve and retrieve information on vital events whenever 13 Ninomiya (1999:8-9) suggests that this

22 12 | 35 | 1 APJ | JF administrative convention is most likely why held by new government administrators, but it New Year cards similarly present the full name proved difficult to prevent existing village of the husband and just the personal name of leaders from stepping into this position in most the wife. communities. For a detailed case study on the compilation process of the 1872 (jinshin) koseki 14 One example of non-registration of birth and and the issue of thekochō , see Toshitani physical disrespect is the Sugamo Incident (for (1987a). details see Kanematsu, Fukushima et al. 1989: v-vi, 91–151). The case is also presented in 22 It should be noted that Edict 103 does not more poetic and fictionalized form in Kore-eda use the term kokumin, but rather the phrase Hirokazu’s movie Daremo Shiranai (English nihonjin-taru no bungen: ‘the status of being title, Nobody Knows). Japanese’. (See Kamoto, this volume for more details on Edict 103.) For a German translation 15 German and French, for example, make this of Edict 103 see Tomson (1971: 227–28.) distinction, using for the former meaning the terms Gesetz and loi, and for the latter 23 The 1872 Koseki required that each meaning the terms Recht and droit. administrative household be identified by family class zokusho( ). Encompassing 16 This passage on Aristotle is inspired by a categories such as nobility (kazoku), 2012 New York Times opinion piece by the (shizoku), lower samurai (sotsu), peasant (nō), political scientist Jacqueline Stevens. artisan (kō), and merchant (shō), the family class item obviously perpetuated the status 17 ShihōshōOrder No. 94 of 29 December 1947. pattern of Edo era society. But where the status

18 system of the Edo era divided the population For details on the emergence and structure via status-specific registration systems (e.g. of Edict 170, see Fukushima (1959b), or ninbetsuchō, and separate registers for Krogness (2008: 90–92) for a brief overview. shizoku, sotsu, temple and shrine populations 19 Kashiwazaki (1998a: 293) reminds us that (jishaseki), and eta/hinin), the modern, uniform initial internal inclusiveness regarding1872 koseki turned these status divisions into citizenship is a rather generic feature of state ko unit subcategories. Family class categories building. also included occupational designations, for example such-and-such appointment (bōyaku), 20 Having served in various capacities at the employment (bōshoku), or vocation (bōtosei). Ministry of Justice’s Civil Affairs Bureau The family class entry also became a site for (Minjikyoku), which is in charge of the koseki perpetuating the discrimination of eta/hinin, for system, and at the Ministry of Justice’sexample by identifying these population groups Regional Legal Affairs Bureau Hōmukyoku( ), by way of specific occupational terms, for the legal scholar, administrator, professor and example ’miscellaneous work’ zatsugyō( (雑 lawyer Tashiro Aritsugu (born 1928) is a 業). The family class entry was abolished in leading authority on the legal and1947. Access is not available to copies of the administrative aspects of thekoseki system. 1872 koseki registers, and the family class Kidana Shō ichi acknowledges the importance entry has been been erased in all subsequent of Tashiro’s 1974 volume in his follow-up pre-war registers to protect theburaku volume Nationality Law: With Item-by-Item minority’s right to privacy (Krogness Annotations (Kidana 2003: 1). 2008:15,28-29, 212-219).

21 The state intended the kochō position to be 24 The post-war two-generationalko- unit is

23 12 | 35 | 1 APJ | JF similar to the nuclear family to the extent that the Japanese population both by actual it is defined as “a married couple and their residence and by honseki area (honsekichi). children, who bear the same surname.” Usually Given the tendency in many families to couples choose the husband’s surname as their maintain an ‘ancestral honseki’, the ‘residential ko-unit index. Their conjugal children will population’ and the ‘honseki population’ often receive that surname, for example Tanaka. This differ considerably in a given village or Tanaka ko-unit is a unique administrative municipal ward. The honseki population of a entity; koseki parlance the surname that village tends to be larger than the residential indexes a unit is called an uji (氏). Should this population. Conversely, in a municipal ward the Tanaka family include a child that the female residential population tends to outnumber its spouse already had from an earlierhonseki population. relationship, then that child’s surname would be different from that of the present husband 27 According to koseki scholar Shinmi Kichiji, and therefore not registered in that conjugal the honseki principle may represent a feudal ko-unit. Even if the biological father’s surname remnant rooted in the notations made in the was Tanaka, too, that child would need to be registers of samurai and lower samurai to adopted by the present husband to acquire his indicate particular territorial ties (Shinmi 1959: uji and thus enter his register. 297). 28 25 The Government Section of the Supreme See Krogness (2008: 221–26) for a general Commander for the Allied Powers, which was in discussion of honseki in relation to the charge of the legal reforms of the Civil Code, administrative ie‘ ’ order, as a signifier of Koseki Law and Nationality Law, insisted on familial or territorial rootedness, and as deleting these provisions, as automatic loss of indicator of minority backgrounds. citizenship due to marriage, acknowledgement 29 or adoptions infringed on individual freedom. Minpō to koseki wo kangaeru onnatachi no renrakukai (the women’s council concerned 26 Japanese statistics, for instance, account for with the Civil Code and the koseki).

24