The Administrative Complaint Review Act establishes procedures for challenging an Administrative Disposition or inaction by an administrative agency through a Request for Administrative Review and related routes. Article 1 states that the Act provides a system for broad complaints to administrative agencies under simple, prompt, and fair procedures, while Article 2 allows a person dissatisfied with an Administrative Disposition to file a Request for Administrative Review and Article 3 allows a person who applied for a disposition to challenge inaction after a reasonable period has passed. A person checking how to file, how proceedings are conducted, or what form an Administrative Determination takes consults the Act's chapters on reviewing agencies, review officers, proceedings, consultation, determinations, re-investigation, and re-examination. This article explains those statutory mechanisms as verified on e-Gov Law Search, but it does not address court litigation or the merits of any individual administrative dispute.
Review Requests for Dispositions and Inaction
The Act begins by separating two objects of review: Administrative Dispositions and inaction. Article 2 concerns dissatisfaction with an Administrative Disposition, while Article 3 concerns a failure to make any disposition after an application has been filed under laws and regulations.
Article 4 identifies the administrative agency to which a Request for Administrative Review is generally made. The review is filed with the higher administrative agency nearest above the agency that made the disposition, or with the agency that made the disposition when there is no higher administrative agency or where the agency itself falls within the statutory categories in Article 4. Article 5 addresses cases where a Request for Re-Investigation may be made to the agency that made the disposition before a Request for Administrative Review. Article 5(2) allows a Request for Administrative Review before the Re-Investigation Decision in specified situations, including where three months have passed since the Re-Investigation Request without a decision or where there is an urgent need to avoid serious harm.
Article 6 provides for Requests for Re-Examination where another law allows them after an Administrative Determination on a Request for Administrative Review. Article 7 lists dispositions and omissions excluded from Chapters II through IV, including dispositions made by Diet resolution, court judgments or execution, criminal investigation acts, and several other categories. Article 8 states that the period during which a Request for Administrative Review, Request for Re-Investigation, or Request for Re-Examination is pending does not suspend prescription, statutory periods, or other time limits.
Reviewing Agency, Review Officer, and Participants
The Act assigns the initial conduct of proceedings to a Reviewing Agency and, in ordinary cases, to a Review Officer appointed from staff of that Reviewing Agency. Article 9 is the central provision on the Review Officer.
Article 9(1) requires the Reviewing Agency to nominate a person to conduct the proceedings from among its employees and notify the Requester for Review and the Agency Reaching the Disposition, etc., unless a listed commission or other body is the Reviewing Agency, a prefectural or municipal ordinance has special provisions for dispositions based on that ordinance, or the request is dismissed under Article 24. Article 9(2) excludes persons with specified connections to the case from serving as Review Officer, including persons involved in the challenged disposition or related re-investigation decision, the Requester for Review, close relatives, representatives, former representatives, guardians, and interested persons under Article 13.
Article 10 allows an unincorporated association or foundation with a representative or administrator to file under its own name. Article 11 allows up to three representatives for joint requesters; those representatives may act for the other joint requesters except for withdrawal, and notices to joint requesters may be given to one representative even if two or more representatives have been selected. Article 12 allows a request to be made through a representative and limits withdrawal by that representative to cases with special authority. Article 13 allows interested persons to participate with Review Officer permission or on the Review Officer's request. Article 14 transfers documents and objects when the authority of a Reviewing Agency changes after filing. Article 15 addresses succession of the Requester for Review's status when the requester dies, when a corporation or other body merges or splits, or when the right connected with the challenged disposition is transferred with Reviewing Agency permission. Article 16 requires the agency that should become the Reviewing Agency to endeavor to set and publicize a standard period from receipt of the request to determination, and Article 17 requires efforts to prepare and publicize a list of persons who may serve as Review Officers.
Filing, Correction, Stay of Execution, and Withdrawal
The filing provisions control both the timing and the form of a Request for Administrative Review. Article 18 sets the time limits for requests concerning Administrative Dispositions.
Article 18(1) provides that a Request for Administrative Review concerning an Administrative Disposition may not be made after three months have passed from the day following the day on which the person learned that the disposition had been made, except where there is a legitimate reason. If a Request for Re-Investigation was made for that disposition, the three-month rule is replaced by a one-month period from the day after learning of the Re-Investigation Decision. Article 18(2) also sets a one-year limit from the day after the disposition or Re-Investigation Decision was made, again subject to legitimate reason. Article 18(3) excludes mailing or correspondence delivery time from the calculation when the written request is submitted by postal or specified correspondence delivery service.
Article 19 requires submission of a written request unless another law or ordinance allows an oral request. For a disposition, the written request must state matters including the requester's name and address, the content of the disposition, the date on which the requester learned of it, the purpose and reasons for the request, whether instructions were given by the Agency Reaching the Disposition and their content, and the request date. Article 20 governs oral requests where allowed, Article 21 allows filing through the Agency Reaching the Disposition when the proper Reviewing Agency differs from it, and Article 22 provides relief where the agency gave incorrect instructions about the agency to which the request should be made. Article 23 allows correction of defects, Article 24 allows dismissal without proceedings if defects are not corrected or if illegality cannot be corrected, Article 25 governs stay of execution, Article 26 allows cancellation of a stay where circumstances change, and Article 27 allows the requester to withdraw the request before determination.
Proceedings Before the Review Officer
The proceedings chapter gives the Review Officer tools for building the record before a determination. Article 28 states that the Requester for Review, participants, the Agency Reaching the Disposition, etc., and the Review Officer must cooperate and seek planned progress of proceedings for simple, prompt, and fair review.
Article 29 requires the Review Officer, after nomination, to send a copy of the written request or oral-request record to the Agency Reaching the Disposition, etc. and to request a Written Explanation within a reasonable period. For a request concerning a disposition, the Written Explanation must state the content and reasons of the disposition. For a request concerning inaction, it must state the reason no disposition has been made and the expected timing, content, and reason of the planned disposition. Article 29(5) requires the Review Officer to send the Written Explanation to the Requester for Review and participants.
Article 30 allows the Requester for Review to submit a Written Rebuttal against matters in the Written Explanation, and allows participants to submit Written Opinions. The Review Officer must send those documents to the other persons concerned with the proceedings. Article 31 gives the Requester for Review or participant an opportunity to make an Oral Opinion Statement when requested, unless giving that opportunity is difficult because of the applicant's whereabouts or other circumstances; the applicant may also ask questions to the Agency Reaching the Disposition, etc. with Review Officer permission. Article 32 allows the Requester for Review, participant, and Agency Reaching the Disposition, etc. to submit evidence documents or articles of evidence within a period set by the Review Officer. Article 33 allows the Review Officer to request submission of documents or other articles from their holder, and Article 34 allows statements by witnesses or expert examinations. Article 35 permits verification at a necessary place, and Article 36 permits questions to persons concerned with proceedings. Article 37 allows planned scheduling for complex cases, Article 38 allows the Requester for Review or participant to request inspection or copies of submitted documents and other materials before proceedings close, and Article 41 allows proceedings to be closed when the necessary proceedings have been completed or when the requester fails to act within a required period. Article 42 requires the Review Officer to prepare a Review Officer's Written Opinion without delay after closing proceedings and submit it with the case record to the Reviewing Agency.
Consultation and Administrative Determinations
After the Review Officer's Written Opinion is submitted, Article 43 controls whether the case is sent to an Administrative Complaint Review Board, etc. The provision distinguishes ordinary consultation from cases where consultation is unnecessary because another deliberative process applies, the requester does not want consultation and no participant objects, the case is recognized as not requiring consultation, the request is unlawful and will be dismissed, or the disposition or de facto act will be fully cancelled or withdrawn without opposition.
Article 43(2) requires consultation to be accompanied by copies of the Review Officer's Written Opinion and the case record. Article 43(3) requires the Reviewing Agency to notify the persons concerned with proceedings that consultation was made and to send them a copy of the Review Officer's Written Opinion. Article 44 then requires the Reviewing Agency to make an Administrative Determination without delay after receiving the board response, after receiving the Review Officer's Written Opinion where consultation is unnecessary, or after completing another required deliberation.
Article 45 requires dismissal where a request concerning a disposition was filed after the statutory period or is otherwise unlawful, and rejection where the request has no grounds. Article 46 governs cases where a request concerning a disposition has grounds: the Reviewing Agency may cancel or modify the disposition, order the Agency Reaching the Disposition to cancel or modify it, or order a disposition on an application where the statutory conditions in Article 46(2) are met. Article 47 concerns de facto acts by requiring the Reviewing Agency to declare the act illegal or improper and to order withdrawal or modification, or to withdraw or modify it itself, in cases where the statutory relationship between the Reviewing Agency and the agency responsible for the de facto act permits that measure. Article 48 prohibits changing the disposition or de facto act to the disadvantage of the Requester for Review when the request is accepted under Article 46 or Article 47. Article 49 concerns inaction, including a declaration that the inaction is illegal or improper and, in specified cases, an order to make a disposition or the making of the disposition by the Reviewing Agency itself. Article 50 requires a written determination stating the operative text, case outline, summary of arguments, and reasons, including reasons for departing from the Review Officer's Written Opinion or board response. Article 51 states when a determination takes effect, Article 52 states that a determination binds related administrative agencies, and Article 53 requires return of evidence documents and other submitted items after determination.
Re-Investigation, Re-Examination, and Review Boards
The Act provides two additional review routes besides the ordinary Request for Administrative Review. Chapter III concerns Requests for Re-Investigation, and Chapter IV concerns Requests for Re-Examination.
Article 54 sets the filing periods for a Request for Re-Investigation: three months from the day after learning that the disposition was made, and one year from the day after the disposition was made, subject to legitimate reason. Article 55 provides relief where the Agency Reaching the Disposition incorrectly failed to instruct that a Re-Investigation Request was available and a Request for Administrative Review was instead filed. Article 57 requires written instruction that a Request for Administrative Review may be made immediately if three months have passed after the Re-Investigation Request remains pending. Article 58 requires dismissal of an unlawful Re-Investigation Request and rejection of a request with no grounds. Article 59 governs acceptance: for a disposition, the Agency Reaching the Disposition cancels or modifies all or part of the disposition; for a de facto act, it declares the act illegal or improper and withdraws or modifies all or part of it. Article 60 requires the Re-Investigation Decision to be made by a written decision stating the operative text and reasons, signed and sealed by the Agency Reaching the Disposition, and it requires instructions about the next Request for Administrative Review route unless the decision fully cancels or withdraws the challenged disposition or act.
Article 62 sets the filing periods for a Request for Re-Examination: one month from the day after learning of the original Administrative Determination, and one year from the day after the original Administrative Determination was made, subject to legitimate reason. Article 63 requires the original determination record to be sent, Article 64 governs dismissal and rejection of Re-Examination Requests, and Article 65 governs acceptance by cancelling all or part of the original determination or ordering withdrawal of a de facto act. Article 66 applies provisions on Requests for Administrative Review to Re-Examination Requests with replacements and exclusions.
Chapter V establishes the Administrative Complaint Review Board and related boards. Article 67 establishes the national Administrative Complaint Review Board in the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications. Article 68 sets the Board at nine members, Article 69 governs appointment, term, removal, secrecy, and political-activity restrictions for members, Article 70 provides for a chairperson, Article 71 allows expert members for specialized matters, Article 72 provides for three-member panels or full-member panels, and Article 73 establishes the secretariat. Article 74 gives the Board investigation powers, Article 75 provides for oral statements, Article 76 allows written arguments and materials, Article 78 allows inspection or copies of submitted materials subject to third-party interests and other proper reasons, and Article 79 requires the Board to endeavor to answer consultations promptly. Article 81 requires local public entities to establish bodies corresponding to the Administrative Complaint Review Board when they must consult such a body under Article 43(1).