Although there is little doubt that crimes by foreign nationals are increasing, they must be understood in proper contexts. Among others, it is necessary to keep in mind the following three points: 1) crimes by Japanese nationals are also rising; 2) the number of foreigners visiting and living in Japan is increasing; and 3) the majority of crimes committed by foreign nationals are immigration law violations. With that said, this section looks into official crime statistics involving “illegal aliens.”
Foreign visitors (rainichi gaikokujin) is a category used in official crime reports. It encompasses all foreign-born nationals coming to Japan on temporary visas, including tourists, long-term residents, and visa overstayers. Conversely, they exclude permanent residents and American military personnel as well as unidentified foreigners (such as illegal entrants).39 Oddly, foreign nationals with permanent residency fall into the category of “Japanese.”
Although deterioration in public safety is often attributed to foreign visitors, especially “illegal aliens,” close scrutiny of actual crime data reveals a more nuanced picture of foreign crime. To take recent crime statistics for example, the 2003 White Paper on Police recorded 34,746 cases of arrest or prosecution involving foreign visitors in 2002, up 25.2% from the previous year (p. 2; JT, 2003, September 27, n.p.). The figures were, however, grossly inflated since they included immigration law violations, the type of offense applicable only to foreign nationals.40 Alleged cases of penal code offenses (keihōhan) by foreign visitors totaled 24,258 in 2002, involving 7,690 individuals (JT, 2003, September 27, n.p.). Foreign visitors made up 2.2% of all the criminal suspects (Gaikokujin Sabetsu Wotchi Nettowāku, 2004, p. 11). The figure was not remarkably high, considering that registered foreigners alone make up nearly 1.5% of the total population. Although Police White Paper (2003) noted that the number of foreign visitors apprehended for criminal offenses had risen by 11% in the past decade, the total number of foreigners newly entering Japan had increased at an even sharper rate (p. 2; see also Tables 4.1-2).
Table 4.1: Number of Foreigners Newly Entering Japan (in thousands)
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Total 3504 3856 3926 3747 3831 3732 4245 4670 4557 4901 5272 5286 5772 % * n/a 10.0% 1.8% - 4.6% 2.2% -2.6% 13.7% 10.0% -2.4% 7.6% 7.6% 0.3% 9.2%
* denotes an increase over the previous year
Sources: Keisatsuchō, 1995, p. 285, 2003, p. 2
Agreement which accompanies the U.S.-Japan Security Treaty, are exempted from alien registration, and thus are not subject to immigration control” (p. 126).
40 Immigration law violations are classed under Special Law offenses that comprise offenses concerning elections,
traffic laws, preservation of public order, finance and economy, illicit drugs, public morals, and alien registration and immigration, among others (Finch, 2000, p. 240)
Table 4.2: Foreign Visitors Arrested for Criminal Offenses (1990-2002) 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 Total 2978 4813 5961 7276 6989 6527 6026 5435 5382 5963 6329 7168 7690 Percent n/a 61.6 23.8 22.0 -0.4 -6.7 -7.7 -10.0 -0.1 10.70 4.40 13.26 7.28 Felonious offense 111 126 185 246 230 201 212 213 251 347 318 403 353 Violent offense 157 174 213 277 246 255 279 313 305 338 568 578 628 Larceny 1656 2493 2944 3995 3937 3900 3399 3155 3098 3404 3803 4135 4395 White-collar offense 139 94 443 260 218 302 497 305 319 264 277 267 339 Others 915 1926 2176 2498 2358 1869 1639 1449 1409 1610 1363 1785 1975 Note: The figures exclude traffic offenses.
Sources: National Police Agency, 2000, p. 90; Keisatsuchō, 2002b, p. 27, 2003a, p. 3, 2003b, p. 37
Of all the foreign visitors apprehended for criminal offenses, 17%, or 1,403, were found to be “illegal aliens”; they accounted for 0.4% of the total criminal suspects in 2002 (Nakashima, 2004b, pp. 11-12; see also Table 4.3).
Table 4.3: Number of Individuals and “Illegal Aliens” Apprehended for Criminal Offenses (1993- 2003)
1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
a. Total 297.7 307.9 293.2 295.5 313.5 324.2 315.3 309.6 325.2 347.5
b. Illegal aliens 1015 1215 1315 1632 1317 1302 1529 1603 1379 1403
Percentage* 0.34 0.39 0.45 0.55 0.42 0.4 0.48 0.52 0.42 0.4
Notes: The figures for “a” are in thousands.
* denotes the percentage of ‘illegal aliens” in the total criminal suspects.
Source: Nakashima, 2004b, p. 11.
In 2003, 84% of the crimes committed by penal code offenders in the foreign visitor population were larcenies (Gaikokujin Sabetsu Wotchi Nettowāku, 2004, p. 13). The high incidence of larcenies indicates that foreign visitors resorted to crime predominantly for financial
reasons. Felonious crimes—which comprised homicide, robbery, arson, and rape—involved 477 foreign visitors in 2003 (Keisatsuchō, 2004b, p. 2). The homicide cases by foreign visitors had even dropped from 69 cases in 1998 to 34 in 2002 (Nakashima, 2004b, p. 14).
Felonious crimes occupied a meager 1.2% of the total criminal offenses by the foreign visitor population in 2003 (Keisatsuchō, 2004b, pp. 2-3). Among the foreign visitors arrested for felonious crimes, 175 were “illegal aliens,” including 16 persons charged with homicide. “Illegal aliens” constituted 2.1% of all the individuals charged with felonious crimes (see Table 4.4). Most of them (145 out of 175) were arrested on robbery charge. It is clear from Table 4.4 that felonious offenses by “illegal aliens” remained fairly stable over the past decade.
Table 4.4: Number of Japanese Nationals, Foreign Visitors, and Illegal Aliens Arrested on Charge of Felonious Crimes (1993-2003) Year 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Japanese 4,944 5,296 5,108 5,247 6,420 6,698 6,870 7,170 7,087 7,373 7,885 % 95.3% 95.8% 96.2% 96.1% 96.8% 96.4% 95.2% 95.8% 94.6% 95.4% 94.3% Foreign visitors 246 230 201 212 213 251 347 318 403 353 477 % 4.7% 4.2% 3.8% 3.9% 3.2% 3.6% 4.8% 4.2% 5.4% 4.6% 5.7% Illegal aliens 130 133 106 142 131 137 186 159 180 141 175 % 2.5% 2.4% 2.0% 2.6% 2.0% 2.0% 2.6% 2.1% 2.4% 1.8% 2.1%
Sources: Gaikokujin Sabetsu Wotchi Nettowāku, 2003, p. 14; Keisatsuchō, 2004b, p. 8; Nakashima, 2004b, p. 12
It is apparent that an increasing number of foreign visitors have committed felonious crimes in recent years. But so have Japanese nationals (see Figure 4.2 on the next page). Unfortunately, the upsurge in felonious crimes by foreign visitors alone has been highlighted in official documents.
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 Foreign visitors 246 230 201 212 213 251 347 318 403 353 477 Japanese 4944 5296 5108 5247 6420 6698 6870 7170 7087 7373 7885 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
Source: Gaikokujin Sabetsu Wotchi Nettowāku, 2004, p. 14
Figure 4.2: Number of Foreign Visitors and the Japanese Apprehended for Felonious Crimes
4.4.2 Statistics on Crimes by Chinese nationals
Of the total foreign visitors apprehended for penal code offenses in the first half of 2004, the Chinese occupied 50.9%, followed by Brazilians at 12.0%, Koreans at 7.1%, Vietnamese at 5.9%, Peruvians at 4.1%, and Filipinos at 4.0% (Keisatsuchō, 2004b, p. 33). Chinese nationals committed 77 felonious crimes (47.8%); 42 cases of felonious crimes involved Brazilians (26.1%) (Keisatsuchō, 2004b, p. 33). 76 Chinese nationals (46.6%) and 49 Brazilians (30.1%) were arrested for robbery in this period (Keisatsuchō, 2004b, p. 33).
It is incontrovertible that the Chinese make up about half of the crimes by the foreign visitor population. Also, as Table 4.5 shows, the number of Chinese criminal offenders has almost doubled in the past decade. But these crime figures for the Chinese must be understood
in relation to those for other nationals. It is especially important to bear in mind that crimes by Brazilians—97% of whom are Nikkeijin and their families—have increased by more than fourfold during the same period (Papademetriou and Hamilton, 2000, p. 41).
Table 4.5: Number of Foreign Visitors Apprehended for Criminal Law Offenses by Nationality (1993-2003) 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 China 2,668 2,942 2,725 2,504 2,320 2,281 2,721 3,038 3,232 3,503 4,444 S/N Korea 987 775 752 732 522 548 593 603 581 473 496 Brazil 223 301 318 304 347 536 658 682 958 952 1,005 Peru 470 470 386 310 264 255 263 261 326 327 364 Vietnam 200 198 252 274 329 340 347 377 469 583 549 Iran 544 294 167 150 103 72 66 64 68 69 47 Philippines 366 396 301 326 315 269 237 241 243 294 329
Sources: Keisatsuchō, 1998a, p. 261; 2000a, p.241; 2001a, p. 218; 2003b, p. 39; 2004a, p. 11
Particularly notable in this regard is Masahide Maeda’s study of official crime statistics. From the official crime data in 2001 he tabulated the number of criminal suspects per 1,000 registered foreigners by nationality. The study found that Vietnamese by far topped the list, followed by Iranians and Brazilians (see Table 4.6).
Table 4.6: Number of Criminal Suspects per 1,000 Registered Nationals in 2001
Vietnamese 28.64 Filipinos 1.3 Iranians 12.83 Thais 0.92 Brazilians 11.71 Malaysians 0.82 Russians 3.33 Koreans 0.45 Chinese 2.46 Americans 0.15 Source: Maeda, 2003, p. 64
Despite the fact that most Vietnamese and Brazilians in Japan are legal long-term residents, the rates of criminal offences by these nationals are disproportionately high. What can be inferred from Tables 4.5-6 is that crimes by foreign visitors are spurred not so much by their legal status as by their living and working conditions. At least it is grossly unfair to impute the soaring crime rates by foreigners to “illegal aliens” alone.
4.4.3 Observation
To recapitulate the main points, “illegal aliens” commit only a small number of felonious crimes. Nevertheless, the public’s fear lingers that “illegal aliens” are endangering Japan’s public safety. A recent poll conducted by the Cabinet Office (Naikakufu) (2004b), for example, discloses that the general public perceives the rise in the number of “illegal aliens” as the biggest cause of deteriorating public safety and social order in Japan (p. 12). While people’s fear of crime is usually disproportionate to the actual risks they are subject to (Fairclough, 1995, p. 153), a gap between the reality of illegal aliens’ crimes and the public perception thereof is stunning.
There are both quantitative and qualitative approaches for explaining this gap. Sociology Professor Ryōgo Mabuchi of Nara University (2003) takes the first approach. He surveyed the frequency of Asahi Shimbun reports on apprehensions of the Japanese and foreign nationals, respectively, during the first six months of 1998. His survey found that the arrests of foreign visitors were nearly 5 times more likely to be reported than those of Japanese nationals (see Table 4.7 on the next page for the survey results).
Table 4.7: Frequency of Press Reports on the Arrests of Suspects by Nationality
Japanese Foreign
Visitors Chinese Korean Brazilians Filipinos Americans Thais
1 Media reports 4,826 390 168 88 8 20 6 4 2 Actual arrests 324,263 5,382 2,401 548 536 269 89 84 3 1 divided by 2 1.49% 7.25% 7.00% 16.06% 1.49% 7.43% 6.74% 4.76% 4 Ratio 1 4.87 4.7 10.79 1 5 4.53 3.2 Source: Mabuchi, 2003, n.p.
Table 4.7 also indicates that the apprehensions of foreigners were over-reported with the only exception of Brazilians. Although Brazilians constituted the third largest group for actual arrests, they were not frequently covered in the newspaper. Instead, Asahi Shimbun shed more light on Filipinos whose arrest cases were much smaller than Brazilians’. This tendency remains the same to date. As Sekiguchi (2002) suggests, even when the mass media take up the issue of Brazilians’ crimes, they tend to be depicted more favorably in the media relative to other nationals (p. 201). Granted that the absolute number of Nikkeijin’s crimes is still relatively small. But it is conceivable that their crimes are played down because their legal status and ethnic origin run counter to the prevailing belief that “illegal aliens” from “third countries” are responsible for decline in public safety.
Disproportionate media attention to foreigners’ crimes can also be observed in Nihon
Television (NTV)’s two-hour prime-time police show aired on September 16, 2003 (comparable
to Fox’s COPS except that the former is broadcast on an irregular basis). Although foreign visitors’ crimes made up only 2.1% of all the reported crimes, the show devoted more than 25% of the airtime to foreign crime (JT, 2003, October 7, n.p.). According to the Japan Times on October 7, 2003, “Rightwing Tokyo Gov. Shintarō Ishihara came on after every foreign-specific
segment to remark on, inter alia, the cruelty of Chinese crooks and the need for more police” (n.p.). The overrepresentation of foreign crime in the show is evidenced in Asahi Shimbun’s TV listing (terebi ran) as well. A short description of the show read: “We’ve filmed it! A little kid bleeding from being punched by a foreign theft gang” (AS, 2003, September 16, p. 20).
Insightful and perceptive as Manabe’s quantitative study is, this chapter conducts a textual analysis to explain a gap between the reality of illegal aliens’ crimes and the media coverage thereof. This qualitative approach is useful because the threat of foreigners’ crimes is framed not only as a quantitative increase, but also as a trend toward greater deviousness and atrocity (see, for example, Herbert, 1996, especially Chapter 7). In other words, “illegal aliens” are believed to pose unprecedented threats to Japanese society not only because their crimes are allegedly on a steep rise, but also because they are perceived as committing far more violent, vicious, and organized crimes than the Japanese. For instance, journalist Takashi Orikawa (2004) argues:
Crimes by Chinese have not only rapidly increased in the past few years, but their quality has also drastically changed. Such felonious crimes as murders and robberies have been on the rise, and lock-picking crimes have now become common. Not only their compatriots but also innocent, ordinary Japanese have become victims of their crimes. (p. 10)
Even when crimes by foreigners decrease, control authorities and the media often alarm the public to an increase in their serious offenses (for example, see JT, 2001, September 14, n.p.). For instance, by drawing on a ranking police official, journalist Tateo Tamura (1998) takes a drop in reported cases of foreign visitors’ crimes as proof that their criminal activities have become more insidious, organized, and armed (p. 38).
Having summarized the recent crime statistics concerning “illegal aliens,” the next two sections explore how “illegal” Chinese migrants are portrayed as grave threats to Japan’s public
safety and social order in official crime reports and popular media texts. I first argue that official accounts are partly to blame for the unduly inflated risks of crimes by Chinese “illegals.” Then I demonstrate that the mass media both rely on and transform official accounts to amplify the danger of “illegal” Chinese migrants.