第一条この法律は、行政庁の違法又は不当な処分その他公権力の行使に当たる行為に関し、国民が簡易迅速かつ公正な手続の下で広く行政庁に対する不服申立てをすることができるための制度を定めることにより、国民の権利利益の救済を図るとともに、行政の適正な運営を確保することを目的とする。

Article 1(1)The purpose of this Act is to establish a system for allowing citizens to broadly file complaints against administrative agencies under simple, prompt, and fair procedures concerning illegal or unjust administrative dispositions of administrative agencies or other acts constituting the exercise of public authority, for the aim of relieving the rights and interests of the citizens, and to ensure proper administrative operation.

２行政庁の処分その他公権力の行使に当たる行為（以下単に「処分」という。）に関する不服申立てについては、他の法律に特別の定めがある場合を除くほか、この法律の定めるところによる。

(2)A complaint regarding administrative dispositions or other acts constituting the exercise of public authority by administrative agencies (simply referred to as "disposition" below) are to be filed as provided for in this Act, except as otherwise provided for in other laws.

第二条行政庁の処分に不服がある者は、第四条及び第五条第二項の定めるところにより、審査請求をすることができる。

Article 2A person who is dissatisfied with a disposition by an administrative agency may file a request for review pursuant to the provisions of Article 4 and Article 5, paragraph (2).

第三条法令に基づき行政庁に対して処分についての申請をした者は、当該申請から相当の期間が経過したにもかかわらず、行政庁の不作為（法令に基づく申請に対して何らの処分をもしないことをいう。以下同じ。）がある場合には、次条の定めるところにより、当該不作為についての審査請求をすることができる。

Article 3When a person has filed an application for a disposition with an administrative agency based on laws and regulations but the administrative agency takes no action (meaning that the administrative agency does not take any action for the application based on laws and regulations; referred to as "inaction" below) although a certain period has elapsed after filing the application, the person may file a request for review regarding the inaction pursuant to the provisions of the following Article.

第四条審査請求は、法律（条例に基づく処分については、条例）に特別の定めがある場合を除くほか、次の各号に掲げる場合の区分に応じ、当該各号に定める行政庁に対してするものとする。

Article 4A request for review is to be filed with the administrative agency specified in the following items in accordance with the category of the cases set forth in each of those items, except as otherwise provided for in laws (for a disposition based on Prefectural or Municipal Ordinance, that Ordinance):

第五条行政庁の処分につき処分庁以外の行政庁に対して審査請求をすることができる場合において、法律に再調査の請求をすることができる旨の定めがあるときは、当該処分に不服がある者は、処分庁に対して再調査の請求をすることができる。ただし、当該処分について第二条の規定により審査請求をしたときは、この限りでない。

Article 5(1)When it is possible to file a request for review for a disposition reached by an administrative agency with an administrative agency other than the administrative agency reaching the disposition, and a law provides that a request for re-investigation may be filed, a person who is dissatisfied with the disposition may file a request for re-investigation with the administrative agency reaching the disposition;provided, however, that this does not apply if the person has filed a request for review pursuant to the provisions of Article 2.

２前項本文の規定により再調査の請求をしたときは、当該再調査の請求についての決定を経た後でなければ、審査請求をすることができない。ただし、次の各号のいずれかに該当する場合は、この限りでない。

(2)When a person has filed a request for re-investigation pursuant to the provisions of the main clause of the preceding paragraph, the person may not file a request for review until the decision has been made for the request for re-investigation;provided, however, that this does not apply if the case falls under either of the following items:

第六条行政庁の処分につき法律に再審査請求をすることができる旨の定めがある場合には、当該処分についての審査請求の裁決に不服がある者は、再審査請求をすることができる。

Article 6(1)If a law provides that a request for a re-examination may be filed for a disposition rendered by an administrative agency, a person who is dissatisfied with the administrative determination on a request for review of the disposition may file a request for re-examination.

２再審査請求は、原裁決（再審査請求をすることができる処分についての審査請求の裁決をいう。以下同じ。）又は当該処分（以下「原裁決等」という。）を対象として、前項の法律に定める行政庁に対してするものとする。

(2)A request for re-examination is to be filed for the original administrative determination (meaning an administrative determination on a request for review of a disposition for which a request for re-examination may be filed; the same applies below) or the disposition (referred to as the "original administrative determination, etc." below) with the administrative agency prescribed in the law referred to in the preceding paragraph.

第七条次に掲げる処分及びその不作為については、第二条及び第三条の規定は、適用しない。

Article 7(1)The provisions of Article 2 and Article 3 do not apply to the following dispositions and their inaction:

２国の機関又は地方公共団体その他の公共団体若しくはその機関に対する処分で、これらの機関又は団体がその固有の資格において当該処分の相手方となるもの及びその不作為については、この法律の規定は、適用しない。

(2)The provisions of this Act do not apply to a disposition rendered to national government organs, local governments, other public entities or their organs, for which those organs or entities are to be the party subject to the disposition in their distinct status as governmental entities, and their inaction.

第八条前条の規定は、同条の規定により審査請求をすることができない処分又は不作為につき、別に法令で当該処分又は不作為の性質に応じた不服申立ての制度を設けることを妨げない。

Article 8For dispositions or inaction for which requests for review may not be made pursuant to the provisions of the preceding Article, the provisions of that Article do not preclude the establishment of a system for filing administrative complaints in accordance with the nature of the dispositions or inaction as provided for separately by laws and regulations.

第九条第四条又は他の法律若しくは条例の規定により審査請求がされた行政庁（第十四条の規定により引継ぎを受けた行政庁を含む。以下「審査庁」という。）は、審査庁に所属する職員（第十七条に規定する名簿を作成した場合にあっては、当該名簿に記載されている者）のうちから第三節に規定する審理手続（この節に規定する手続を含む。）を行う者を指名するとともに、その旨を審査請求人及び処分庁等（審査庁以外の処分庁等に限る。）に通知しなければならない。ただし、次の各号のいずれかに掲げる機関が審査庁である場合若しくは条例に基づく処分について条例に特別の定めがある場合又は第二十四条の規定により当該審査請求を却下する場合は、この限りでない。

Article 9(1)An administrative agency with which a request for review has been filed pursuant to the provisions of Article 4, or the provisions of other laws or Prefectural or Municipal Ordinance (including an administrative agency that has taken over the relevant documents and objects pursuant to the provisions of Article 14; referred to as a "reviewing agency" below) must nominate a person who conducts the procedures for proceedings prescribed in Section 3 (including procedures prescribed in this Section) from among the employees that belong to the reviewing agency (when a name list prescribed in Article 17 has been prepared, persons stated in that name list), and notify that fact to the requestor for review and the administrative agency, etc. reaching the disposition (limited to the administrative agency, etc. reaching the disposition other than the reviewing agency);provided, however, that this does not apply when any of the agencies stated in the following items fall under the reviewing agency or there are specific provisions in the Prefectural or Municipal Ordinance for dispositions based on the Ordinance, or when the request for review is dismissed pursuant to the provisions of Article 24:

２審査庁が前項の規定により指名する者は、次に掲げる者以外の者でなければならない。

(2)A person to be nominated by the reviewing agency pursuant to the provisions of the preceding paragraph must be a person other than those stated in the following items:

３審査庁が第一項各号に掲げる機関である場合又は同項ただし書の特別の定めがある場合においては、別表第一の上欄に掲げる規定の適用については、これらの規定中同表の中欄に掲げる字句は、それぞれ同表の下欄に掲げる字句に読み替えるものとし、第十七条、第四十条、第四十二条及び第五十条第二項の規定は、適用しない。

(3)When the reviewing agency is one of the agencies stated in the items of paragraph (1) or when there are specific provisions in the proviso to that paragraph, for applying the provisions stated in the left-hand column of the Appended Table 1, the terms in those provisions stated in the middle column of that Table are to be replaced with the terms stated in the right-hand column of that Table, and the provisions of Article 17, Article 40, Article 42, and Article 50, paragraph (2) do not apply.

４前項に規定する場合において、審査庁は、必要があると認めるときは、その職員（第二項各号（第一項各号に掲げる機関の構成員にあっては、第一号を除く。）に掲げる者以外の者に限る。）に、前項において読み替えて適用する第三十一条第一項の規定による審査請求人若しくは第十三条第四項に規定する参加人の意見の陳述を聴かせ、前項において読み替えて適用する第三十四条の規定による参考人の陳述を聴かせ、同項において読み替えて適用する第三十五条第一項の規定による検証をさせ、前項において読み替えて適用する第三十六条の規定による第二十八条に規定する審理関係人に対する質問をさせ、又は同項において読み替えて適用する第三十七条第一項若しくは第二項の規定による意見の聴取を行わせることができる。

(4)In the case prescribed in the preceding paragraph, if it is found necessary, the reviewing agency may have its employees (limited to persons other than those stated in the items of paragraph (2) (for members of the organs stated in the items of paragraph (1), excluding item (i))) hear opinions of the requestor for review prescribed in Article 31, paragraph (1) as applied pursuant to the preceding paragraph following the deemed replacement of terms or the intervenor prescribed in Article 13, paragraph (4), hear opinions of the witness under the provisions of Article 34 as applied pursuant to the preceding paragraph following the deemed replacement of terms, conduct a verification under the provisions of Article 35, paragraph (1) as applied pursuant to the preceding paragraph following the deemed replacement of terms, ask questions to the persons concerned with proceedings prescribed in Article 28 under the provisions of Article 36 as applied pursuant to the preceding paragraph following the deemed replacement of terms, or hold a hearing of opinions under the provisions of Article 37, paragraph (1) or (2) as applied pursuant to the preceding paragraph following the deemed replacement of terms.

第十条法人でない社団又は財団で代表者又は管理人の定めがあるものは、その名で審査請求をすることができる。

Article 10An unincorporated association or foundation that has designated a representative or administrator may file a request for review in the name of the association or foundation.

第十一条多数人が共同して審査請求をしようとするときは、三人を超えない総代を互選することができる。

Article 11(1)When a large number of persons intend to jointly file a request for review, they may elect up to three representative members from among themselves.

２共同審査請求人が総代を互選しない場合において、必要があると認めるときは、第九条第一項の規定により指名された者（以下「審理員」という。）は、総代の互選を命ずることができる。

(2)When the joint requestors for review do not elect representative members from among themselves and it is found necessary, a person who has been nominated pursuant to the provisions of Article 9, paragraph (1) (referred to as "review officer" below) may order the joint requestors for review to elect representative members from among themselves.

３総代は、各自、他の共同審査請求人のために、審査請求の取下げを除き、当該審査請求に関する一切の行為をすることができる。

(3)Each of the representative members may conduct all acts related to the request for review, except for the withdrawal of the request on behalf of other joint requestors for review.

４総代が選任されたときは、共同審査請求人は、総代を通じてのみ、前項の行為をすることができる。

(4)When representative members have been appointed, joint requestors for review may conduct the acts referred to in the preceding paragraph only through the representative members.

５共同審査請求人に対する行政庁の通知その他の行為は、二人以上の総代が選任されている場合においても、一人の総代に対してすれば足りる。

(5)Even if two or more representative members have been appointed, it is sufficient for the notice to be given or other acts to be performed by an administrative agency to be given to one of the representative members.

６共同審査請求人は、必要があると認める場合には、総代を解任することができる。

(6)Joint requestors for review may dismiss a representative member if they find it necessary.

第十二条審査請求は、代理人によってすることができる。

Article 12(1)The agent for a requestor for review may file a request for review.

２前項の代理人は、各自、審査請求人のために、当該審査請求に関する一切の行為をすることができる。ただし、審査請求の取下げは、特別の委任を受けた場合に限り、することができる。

(2)Each of the agent referred to in the preceding paragraph may perform all acts related to the request for review on behalf of the requestor for review;provided, however, that the agent may conduct procedures for the withdrawal of the request for review only when they have been specially entrusted by the requestor.

第十三条利害関係人（審査請求人以外の者であって審査請求に係る処分又は不作為に係る処分の根拠となる法令に照らし当該処分につき利害関係を有するものと認められる者をいう。以下同じ。）は、審理員の許可を得て、当該審査請求に参加することができる。

Article 13(1)An interested person (meaning a person other than a requestor for review who is found to have an interest in the disposition related to the request for review or the disposition related to the inaction, in light of the provisions of laws and regulations that serve as the grounds for the disposition; the same applies below) may participate in the request for review by obtaining permission from a review officer.

２審理員は、必要があると認める場合には、利害関係人に対し、当該審査請求に参加することを求めることができる。

(2)A review officer may request an interested persons to participate in the request for review when it is found necessary.

３審査請求への参加は、代理人によってすることができる。

(3)The participation in the request for review may be entrusted to an agent.

４前項の代理人は、各自、第一項又は第二項の規定により当該審査請求に参加する者（以下「参加人」という。）のために、当該審査請求への参加に関する一切の行為をすることができる。ただし、審査請求への参加の取下げは、特別の委任を受けた場合に限り、することができる。

(4)Each of the agent referred to in the preceding paragraph may perform all acts concerning participation in the request for review on behalf of the person who participates in the request for review pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (1) or (2) (referred to as an "intervenor" below); provided, however, that the agent may conduct procedures to withdraw the participation in the request for review only when they have been specially entrusted by the requestor.

第十四条行政庁が審査請求がされた後法令の改廃により当該審査請求につき裁決をする権限を有しなくなったときは、当該行政庁は、第十九条に規定する審査請求書又は第二十一条第二項に規定する審査請求録取書及び関係書類その他の物件を新たに当該審査請求につき裁決をする権限を有することとなった行政庁に引き継がなければならない。この場合において、その引継ぎを受けた行政庁は、速やかに、その旨を審査請求人及び参加人に通知しなければならない。

Article 14When an administrative agency ceases to have the authority to make an administrative determination on a request to review due to the amendment or repeal of laws and regulations after receiving the request to review, the administrative agency must hand over the written request for review prescribed in Article 19 or the written statement concerning the request for review prescribed in Article 21, paragraph (2), the related documents, and other objects to the administrative agency that is newly vested with the authority to make an administrative determination on the request for review. In such a case, the administrative agency that has been handed over those documents and objects must promptly give a notice of that fact to the requestor for review and the intervenors.

第十五条審査請求人が死亡したときは、相続人その他法令により審査請求の目的である処分に係る権利を承継した者は、審査請求人の地位を承継する。

Article 15(1)When a requestor for review dies, an heir or other persons who have succeeded to the right related to the disposition for which the request for review has been filed pursuant to laws and regulations are to succeed to the status of the requestor for review.

２審査請求人について合併又は分割（審査請求の目的である処分に係る権利を承継させるものに限る。）があったときは、合併後存続する法人その他の社団若しくは財団若しくは合併により設立された法人その他の社団若しくは財団又は分割により当該権利を承継した法人は、審査請求人の地位を承継する。

(2)When a requestor for review has undergone a merger or split (limited to a merger or split for having the requestor succeed to the right related to the disposition for which the request for review has been filed), a corporation or other associations or foundations surviving the merger, a corporation or other associations or foundations established by the merger, or a corporation that has succeeded to the right through the split is to succeed to the status of the requestor for review.

３前二項の場合には、審査請求人の地位を承継した相続人その他の者又は法人その他の社団若しくは財団は、書面でその旨を審査庁に届け出なければならない。この場合には、届出書には、死亡若しくは分割による権利の承継又は合併の事実を証する書面を添付しなければならない。

(3)In the cases referred to in the preceding two paragraphs, the heir or other persons, or the corporation or other associations or foundations, which have succeeded to the status of the requestor for review must notify the reviewing agency of that fact in writing. In such a case, a document certifying the fact of the succession of the right due to death or split, or the fact of the merger, must be attached to the written notification.

４第一項又は第二項の場合において、前項の規定による届出がされるまでの間において、死亡者又は合併前の法人その他の社団若しくは財団若しくは分割をした法人に宛ててされた通知が審査請求人の地位を承継した相続人その他の者又は合併後の法人その他の社団若しくは財団若しくは分割により審査請求人の地位を承継した法人に到達したときは、当該通知は、これらの者に対する通知としての効力を有する。

(4)In the case referred to in paragraph (1) or (2), if, before the notification under the preceding paragraph is given, a notice addressed to the deceased, the corporation, or other associations or foundations before the merger or the corporation that has been split reaches the heir or other persons that have succeeded to the status of the requestor for review, or the corporation or other associations or foundations, after the merger or the corporation that has succeeded to the status of the requestor for review through the split, the notice is to have the effect as a notice addressed to those persons.

５第一項の場合において、審査請求人の地位を承継した相続人その他の者が二人以上あるときは、その一人に対する通知その他の行為は、全員に対してされたものとみなす。

(5)In the case referred to in paragraph (1), when there are two or more heirs or other persons that have succeeded to the status of the requestor for review, a notice or other acts given to or performed for one of them is deemed to have been given to or performed for all of them.

６審査請求の目的である処分に係る権利を譲り受けた者は、審査庁の許可を得て、審査請求人の地位を承継することができる。

(6)A person who has received the transfer of the right related to the disposition for which the request for review has been filed, may succeed to the status of the requestor for review by obtaining permission from the reviewing agency.

第十六条第四条又は他の法律若しくは条例の規定により審査庁となるべき行政庁（以下「審査庁となるべき行政庁」という。）は、審査請求がその事務所に到達してから当該審査請求に対する裁決をするまでに通常要すべき標準的な期間を定めるよう努めるとともに、これを定めたときは、当該審査庁となるべき行政庁及び関係処分庁（当該審査請求の対象となるべき処分の権限を有する行政庁であって当該審査庁となるべき行政庁以外のものをいう。次条において同じ。）の事務所における備付けその他の適当な方法により公にしておかなければならない。

Article 16The administrative agency that is to become the reviewing agency pursuant to the provisions of Article 4 or the provisions of other laws or Prefectural or Municipal Ordinance (referred to as "administrative agency that is to become the reviewing agency" below) must endeavor to decide a standard period normally necessary between the time when a request for review arrives at their offices and the time when an administrative determination is to be made, and when the standard period has been decided, publicize the standard period by keeping it at the offices of the administrative agency that is to become the reviewing agency and the related administrative agency reaching the disposition (meaning an administrative agency vested with the authority to render a disposition subject to the request for review other than the administrative agency that is to become the reviewing agency; the same applies in the following Article) or by other appropriate methods.

第十七条審査庁となるべき行政庁は、審理員となるべき者の名簿を作成するよう努めるとともに、これを作成したときは、当該審査庁となるべき行政庁及び関係処分庁の事務所における備付けその他の適当な方法により公にしておかなければならない。

Article 17The administrative agency that is to become the reviewing agency must endeavor to prepare a name list of the persons that are to become review officers, and when the name list has been prepared, publicize the list by keeping it at the offices of the administrative agency that is to become the reviewing agency and the related administrative agency reaching the disposition or by other appropriate methods.

第十八条処分についての審査請求は、処分があったことを知った日の翌日から起算して三月（当該処分について再調査の請求をしたときは、当該再調査の請求についての決定があったことを知った日の翌日から起算して一月）を経過したときは、することができない。ただし、正当な理由があるときは、この限りでない。

Article 18(1)A request for review of a disposition may not be filed when three months have passed from the day following the day on which the relevant person has come to know that the disposition was rendered (if a request for re-investigation has been filed for the disposition, when one month has passed from the day following the day on which the relevant person has come to know that the decision was made for the request for re-investigation);provided, however, that this does not apply when there are legitimate grounds.

２処分についての審査請求は、処分（当該処分について再調査の請求をしたときは、当該再調査の請求についての決定）があった日の翌日から起算して一年を経過したときは、することができない。ただし、正当な理由があるときは、この限りでない。

(2)A request for review of a disposition may not be filed when one year has passed from the day following the day on which the disposition was rendered (if a request for re-investigation has been filed for the disposition, decision on the request for re-investigation);provided, however, that this does not apply when there are legitimate grounds.

３次条に規定する審査請求書を郵便又は民間事業者による信書の送達に関する法律（平成十四年法律第九十九号）第二条第六項に規定する一般信書便事業者若しくは同条第九項に規定する特定信書便事業者による同条第二項に規定する信書便で提出した場合における前二項に規定する期間（以下「審査請求期間」という。）の計算については、送付に要した日数は、算入しない。

(3)When a written request for review prescribed in the following Article has been submitted by mail or corresponding delivery as defined in Article 2, paragraph (2) of the Act on Correspondence Delivery by Private Business Operators (Act No. 99 of 2002) conducted by a general correspondence delivery operator as defined in paragraph (6) of that Article or a specified letter delivery operator as defined in paragraph (9) of that Article, the number of days required for the delivery is not to be included in the calculation of the period prescribed in the preceding two paragraphs (referred to as "period for filing a request for review" below).

第十九条審査請求は、他の法律（条例に基づく処分については、条例）に口頭ですることができる旨の定めがある場合を除き、政令で定めるところにより、審査請求書を提出してしなければならない。

Article 19(1)Unless other laws (for a disposition based on Prefectural or Municipal Ordinance, that Ordinance) provide that a request may be filed orally, a request for review must be filed by submitting a written request for review, pursuant to the provisions of Cabinet Order.

２処分についての審査請求書には、次に掲げる事項を記載しなければならない。

(2)A written request for review of a disposition must state the following matters:

３不作為についての審査請求書には、次に掲げる事項を記載しなければならない。

(3)A written request for review of inaction must state the following matters:

４審査請求人が、法人その他の社団若しくは財団である場合、総代を互選した場合又は代理人によって審査請求をする場合には、審査請求書には、第二項各号又は前項各号に掲げる事項のほか、その代表者若しくは管理人、総代又は代理人の氏名及び住所又は居所を記載しなければならない。

(4)If a requestor for review is a corporation or other associations or foundations, and representative members have been elected from among requestors for review, or a request for review is to be filed by an agent, the written request for review must state the name and domicile or residence of the representative or administrator, the representative members, or the agent, in addition to the matters stated in the items of paragraph (2) or the items of the preceding paragraph.

５処分についての審査請求書には、第二項及び前項に規定する事項のほか、次の各号に掲げる場合においては、当該各号に定める事項を記載しなければならない。

(5)In the cases set forth in the following items, a written request for review of a disposition must state the matters specified in each of those items, in addition to the matters prescribed in paragraph (2) and the preceding paragraph:

第二十条口頭で審査請求をする場合には、前条第二項から第五項までに規定する事項を陳述しなければならない。この場合において、陳述を受けた行政庁は、その陳述の内容を録取し、これを陳述人に読み聞かせて誤りのないことを確認しなければならない。

Article 20When orally filing a request for review, the person must orally state the matters prescribed in paragraphs (2) through (5) of the preceding Article. In such a case, the administrative agency that has received the oral statement must record its content, and read the recording aloud to the person that has made the oral statement to confirm that there are no errors.

第二十一条審査請求をすべき行政庁が処分庁等と異なる場合における審査請求は、処分庁等を経由してすることができる。この場合において、審査請求人は、処分庁等に審査請求書を提出し、又は処分庁等に対し第十九条第二項から第五項までに規定する事項を陳述するものとする。

Article 21(1)A request for review in the case the administrative agency with which the request should be filed is different from the administrative agency, etc. reaching the disposition, may be filed via the administrative agency, etc. reaching the disposition. In such a case, the requestor for review is to submit a written request for review to the administrative agency, etc. reaching the disposition, or orally state the matters prescribed in Article 19, paragraphs (2) through (5) to the administrative agency, etc. reaching the disposition

２前項の場合には、処分庁等は、直ちに、審査請求書又は審査請求録取書（前条後段の規定により陳述の内容を録取した書面をいう。第二十九条第一項及び第五十五条において同じ。）を審査庁となるべき行政庁に送付しなければならない。

(2)In the case referred to in the preceding paragraph, the administrative agency, etc. reaching the disposition must immediately send the written request for review or the written statement concerning the request for review (meaning a document in which the content of the oral statement has been recorded pursuant to the provisions of the second sentence of the preceding Article; the same applies in Article 29, paragraph (1) and Article 55) to the administrative agency that is to become the reviewing agency.

３第一項の場合における審査請求期間の計算については、処分庁に審査請求書を提出し、又は処分庁に対し当該事項を陳述した時に、処分についての審査請求があったものとみなす。

(3)In calculating the period for filing a request for review in the case referred to in paragraph (1), the request for review of the disposition is deemed to have been filed at the time when the written request for review has been submitted, or when the statement of the matters has been made to the administrative agency reaching the disposition.

第二十二条審査請求をすることができる処分につき、処分庁が誤って審査請求をすべき行政庁でない行政庁を審査請求をすべき行政庁として教示した場合において、その教示された行政庁に書面で審査請求がされたときは、当該行政庁は、速やかに、審査請求書を処分庁又は審査庁となるべき行政庁に送付し、かつ、その旨を審査請求人に通知しなければならない。

Article 22(1)Regarding a disposition for which a request for review may be filed, when the administrative agency reaching the disposition has erroneously informed a person that an administrative agency that should not be filed a request for review as the administrative agency with which a request for review should be filed, and the person files a request for review in writing with the administrative agency as informed, the administrative agency must promptly send the written request for review to the administrative agency reaching the disposition or the administrative agency that is to become the reviewing agency, and, notify that fact to the requestor for review.

２前項の規定により処分庁に審査請求書が送付されたときは、処分庁は、速やかに、これを審査庁となるべき行政庁に送付し、かつ、その旨を審査請求人に通知しなければならない。

(2)When the written request for review has been sent to the administrative agency reaching the disposition pursuant to the provisions of the preceding paragraph, the administrative agency reaching the disposition must promptly send the written request to the administrative agency that is to become the reviewing agency, and, notify that fact to the requestor for review.

３第一項の処分のうち、再調査の請求をすることができない処分につき、処分庁が誤って再調査の請求をすることができる旨を教示した場合において、当該処分庁に再調査の請求がされたときは、処分庁は、速やかに、再調査の請求書（第六十一条において読み替えて準用する第十九条に規定する再調査の請求書をいう。以下この条において同じ。）又は再調査の請求録取書（第六十一条において準用する第二十条後段の規定により陳述の内容を録取した書面をいう。以下この条において同じ。）を審査庁となるべき行政庁に送付し、かつ、その旨を再調査の請求人に通知しなければならない。

(3)Regarding a disposition for which a request for re-investigation may not be filed among the dispositions referred to in paragraph (1), when the administrative agency reaching the disposition has erroneously informed a person that a request for re-investigation may be filed and the person files a request for re-investigation with that administrative agency reaching the disposition, that administrative agency reaching the disposition must promptly send the written request for re-investigation (meaning the written request for re-investigation prescribed in Article 19 as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 61 following the deemed replacement of terms; the same applies below in this Article) or the written statement concerning the request for re-investigation (meaning a document in which the content of the oral statement has been recorded pursuant to the provisions of the second sentence of Article 20 as applied mutatis mutandis in Article 61; the same applies below in this Article) to the administrative agency to become the reviewing agency and notify that fact to the requestor for re-investigation.

４再調査の請求をすることができる処分につき、処分庁が誤って審査請求をすることができる旨を教示しなかった場合において、当該処分庁に再調査の請求がされた場合であって、再調査の請求人から申立てがあったときは、処分庁は、速やかに、再調査の請求書又は再調査の請求録取書及び関係書類その他の物件を審査庁となるべき行政庁に送付しなければならない。この場合において、その送付を受けた行政庁は、速やかに、その旨を再調査の請求人及び第六十一条において読み替えて準用する第十三条第一項又は第二項の規定により当該再調査の請求に参加する者に通知しなければならない。

(4)Regarding a disposition for which a request for re-investigation may be filed, when the administrative agency reaching the disposition has erroneously failed to inform a person that a request for review may be filed, and the person has filed a request for re-investigation with that administrative agency reaching the disposition and has filed a petition, that administrative agency reaching the disposition must promptly send the written request for re-investigation or written statement concerning the request for re-investigation and the related documents and other objects to the administrative agency that is to become the reviewing agency. In such a case, the administrative agency that has received those documents and objects must promptly notify that fact to the requestor for re-investigation and a person that participates in the request for re-investigation pursuant to the provisions of Article 13, paragraph (1) or (2) as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 61 following the deemed replacement of terms.

５前各項の規定により審査請求書又は再調査の請求書若しくは再調査の請求録取書が審査庁となるべき行政庁に送付されたときは、初めから審査庁となるべき行政庁に審査請求がされたものとみなす。

(5)When the written request for review, or the written request for re-investigation or written statement concerning the request for re-investigation has been sent to the administrative agency that is to become the reviewing agency pursuant to the provisions of each of the preceding paragraphs, the request for review is deemed to have been filed with the administrative agency that is to become the reviewing agency in the first place.

第二十三条審査請求書が第十九条の規定に違反する場合には、審査庁は、相当の期間を定め、その期間内に不備を補正すべきことを命じなければならない。

Article 23When a written request for review violates the provisions of Article 19, the reviewing agency must specify a reasonable period of time and order the correction of the defects within that period.

第二十四条前条の場合において、審査請求人が同条の期間内に不備を補正しないときは、審査庁は、次節に規定する審理手続を経ないで、第四十五条第一項又は第四十九条第一項の規定に基づき、裁決で、当該審査請求を却下することができる。

Article 24(1)In the case referred to in the preceding Article, when a requestor for review does not correct the defects within the period referred to in that Article, the reviewing agency may dismiss the request for review by an administrative determination, based on the provisions of Article 45, paragraph (1) or Article 49, paragraph (1) without going through the procedures for proceedings prescribed in the following Section.

２審査請求が不適法であって補正することができないことが明らかなときも、前項と同様とする。

(2)The preceding paragraph also applies when it is obvious that a request for review is unlawful and may not be corrected.

第二十五条審査請求は、処分の効力、処分の執行又は手続の続行を妨げない。

Article 25(1)A request for review does not preclude the effect of the disposition, enforcement of the disposition, or continuation of the procedures.

２処分庁の上級行政庁又は処分庁である審査庁は、必要があると認める場合には、審査請求人の申立てにより又は職権で、処分の効力、処分の執行又は手続の続行の全部又は一部の停止その他の措置（以下「執行停止」という。）をとることができる。

(2)When finding it necessary, the higher administrative agency of the administrative agency reaching the disposition or the reviewing agency that is the administrative agency reaching the disposition may suspend the effect of the disposition, enforcement of the disposition, or continuation of procedures, in full or in part, or take other measures (referred to as "stay of enforcement" below), upon a petition filed by the requestor for review or by its authority.

３処分庁の上級行政庁又は処分庁のいずれでもない審査庁は、必要があると認める場合には、審査請求人の申立てにより、処分庁の意見を聴取した上、執行停止をすることができる。ただし、処分の効力、処分の執行又は手続の続行の全部又は一部の停止以外の措置をとることはできない。

(3)When finding it necessary, the reviewing agency that is neither the higher administrative agency of the administrative agency reaching the disposition nor the administrative agency reaching the disposition may order a stay of enforcement, by a petition filed by the requestor for review, after hearing opinions of the administrative agency reaching the disposition;provided, however, that the reviewing agency may not take any measures other than suspending the effect of the disposition, stay of enforcement of the disposition, or continuation of procedures, in full or in part.

４前二項の規定による審査請求人の申立てがあった場合において、処分、処分の執行又は手続の続行により生ずる重大な損害を避けるために緊急の必要があると認めるときは、審査庁は、執行停止をしなければならない。ただし、公共の福祉に重大な影響を及ぼすおそれがあるとき、又は本案について理由がないとみえるときは、この限りでない。

(4)When a petition has been filed by the requestor for review under the provisions of the preceding two paragraphs, and the reviewing agency finds it urgently necessary for avoiding causing serious damage by the disposition, the stay of enforcement of the disposition, or the continuation of procedures, the reviewing agency must order a stay of enforcement;provided, however, that this does not apply when the stay of enforcement is likely to have a material impact on public welfare or when the action on the merits seems groundless.

５審査庁は、前項に規定する重大な損害を生ずるか否かを判断するに当たっては、損害の回復の困難の程度を考慮するものとし、損害の性質及び程度並びに処分の内容及び性質をも勘案するものとする。

(5)When determining whether the serious damage prescribed in the preceding paragraph is to be caused or not, the reviewing agency is to consider the level of difficulty in recovering the damage and also take into account the nature and extent of the damage and the content and nature of the disposition.

６第二項から第四項までの場合において、処分の効力の停止は、処分の効力の停止以外の措置によって目的を達することができるときは、することができない。

(6)In the cases referred to in paragraphs (2) through (4), the suspension of the effect of the disposition may not be ordered when the intended purpose may be achieved through measures other than the suspension of the effect of the disposition.

７執行停止の申立てがあったとき、又は審理員から第四十条に規定する執行停止をすべき旨の意見書が提出されたときは、審査庁は、速やかに、執行停止をするかどうかを決定しなければならない。

(7)When a petition for a stay of enforcement has been filed, or a written opinion stating that the stay of enforcement prescribed in Article 40 should be taken has been submitted by a review officer, the reviewing agency must promptly decide whether or not to order a stay of enforcement.

第二十六条執行停止をした後において、執行停止が公共の福祉に重大な影響を及ぼすことが明らかとなったとき、その他事情が変更したときは、審査庁は、その執行停止を取り消すことができる。

Article 26After the stay of enforcement has been granted, if it becomes clear that the stay of enforcement is to have a material impact on public welfare or when there are any changes to the circumstances, the reviewing agency may revoke the stay of enforcement.

第二十七条審査請求人は、裁決があるまでは、いつでも審査請求を取り下げることができる。

Article 27(1)A requestor for review may withdraw the request anytime until an administrative determination is made.

２審査請求の取下げは、書面でしなければならない。

(2)The withdrawal of a request for review must be filed in writing.

第二十八条審査請求人、参加人及び処分庁等（以下「審理関係人」という。）並びに審理員は、簡易迅速かつ公正な審理の実現のため、審理において、相互に協力するとともに、審理手続の計画的な進行を図らなければならない。

Article 28A requestor for review, an intervenor, and the administrative agency, etc. reaching the disposition (referred to as "persons concerned with proceedings" below), and a review officer must mutually cooperate in the proceedings as well as advance the procedures for proceedings in a planned manner, for the purpose of achieving simple, prompt, and fair proceedings.

第二十九条審理員は、審査庁から指名されたときは、直ちに、審査請求書又は審査請求録取書の写しを処分庁等に送付しなければならない。ただし、処分庁等が審査庁である場合には、この限りでない。

Article 29(1)When having been nominated by the reviewing agency, a review officer must immediately send a copy of the written request for review or written statement concerning the request for review to the administrative agency, etc. reaching the disposition;provided, however, that this does not apply if the administrative agency, etc. reaching the disposition is the reviewing agency.

２審理員は、相当の期間を定めて、処分庁等に対し、弁明書の提出を求めるものとする。

(2)A review officer is to specify a reasonable period of time and request the administrative agency, etc. reaching the disposition to submit a written explanation.

３処分庁等は、前項の弁明書に、次の各号の区分に応じ、当該各号に定める事項を記載しなければならない。

(3)The administrative agency, etc. reaching the disposition must enter the matters specified in the following items in accordance with the category of the cases referred to in each of those items in the written explanation referred to in the preceding paragraph:

４処分庁が次に掲げる書面を保有する場合には、前項第一号に掲げる弁明書にこれを添付するものとする。

(4)When the administrative agency reaching the disposition is to hold the following documents, the documents are to be attached to the written explanation stated in item (i) of the preceding paragraph:

５審理員は、処分庁等から弁明書の提出があったときは、これを審査請求人及び参加人に送付しなければならない。

(5)When a written explanation has been submitted by the administrative agency, etc. reaching the disposition, a review officer must send the written explanation to the requestor for review and the intervenors.

第三十条審査請求人は、前条第五項の規定により送付された弁明書に記載された事項に対する反論を記載した書面（以下「反論書」という。）を提出することができる。この場合において、審理員が、反論書を提出すべき相当の期間を定めたときは、その期間内にこれを提出しなければならない。

Article 30(1)A requestor for review may submit a document that states the counterarguments against the matters stated in the written explanation sent pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (5) of the preceding Article (referred to as "written counterargument" below). In such a case, when a review officer has specified a reasonable period of time during which a written counterargument should be submitted, the requestor for review must submit a written counterargument within that period of time.

２参加人は、審査請求に係る事件に関する意見を記載した書面（第四十条及び第四十二条第一項を除き、以下「意見書」という。）を提出することができる。この場合において、審理員が、意見書を提出すべき相当の期間を定めたときは、その期間内にこれを提出しなければならない。

(2)An intervenor may submit a document that states the opinions on the case related to the request for review (referred to as a "written opinion" below, except in Article 40 and Article 42, paragraph (1)). In such a case, when a review officer has specified a reasonable period of time during which a written opinion should be submitted, the intervenor must submit a written opinion within that period of time.

３審理員は、審査請求人から反論書の提出があったときはこれを参加人及び処分庁等に、参加人から意見書の提出があったときはこれを審査請求人及び処分庁等に、それぞれ送付しなければならない。

(3)When a written counterargument has been submitted by a requestor for review, a review officer must send it to the intervenors and the administrative agency, etc. reaching the disposition, and when a written opinion has been submitted by an intervenor, a review officer must send it to the requestor for review and the administrative agency, etc. reaching the disposition.

第三十一条審査請求人又は参加人の申立てがあった場合には、審理員は、当該申立てをした者（以下この条及び第四十一条第二項第二号において「申立人」という。）に口頭で審査請求に係る事件に関する意見を述べる機会を与えなければならない。ただし、当該申立人の所在その他の事情により当該意見を述べる機会を与えることが困難であると認められる場合には、この限りでない。

Article 31(1)When a petition has been filed by a requestor for review or an intervenor, a review officer must provide the person who has filed the petition (referred to as a "petitioner" below in this Article and Article 41, paragraph (2), item (ii)) with an opportunity to orally state opinions on the case related to the request for review; provided, however, that this does not apply if it is found difficult to provide the petitioner with an opportunity to orally state opinions due to the whereabouts of the petitioner or other circumstances.

２前項本文の規定による意見の陳述（以下「口頭意見陳述」という。）は、審理員が期日及び場所を指定し、全ての審理関係人を招集してさせるものとする。

(2)The oral statement of opinions under the provisions of the main clause of the preceding paragraph (referred to as "oral opinion statement" below) are to be conducted on the date and at the venue designated by a review officer, by having all of the persons concerned with proceedings participate in the procedure.

３口頭意見陳述において、申立人は、審理員の許可を得て、補佐人とともに出頭することができる。

(3)At the time when an oral opinion statement is made, the petitioner may appear together with the assistants, with the permission of the review officer.

４口頭意見陳述において、審理員は、申立人のする陳述が事件に関係のない事項にわたる場合その他相当でない場合には、これを制限することができる。

(4)At the time when an oral opinion statement is made, if the statement by a petitioner refers to matters irrelevant to the case or those inappropriate, a review officer may limit the statement.

５口頭意見陳述に際し、申立人は、審理員の許可を得て、審査請求に係る事件に関し、処分庁等に対して、質問を発することができる。

(5)At the time when an oral opinion statement is made, the petitioner may ask questions on the case related to the request for review to the administrative agency, etc. reaching the disposition, with the permission of the review officer.

第三十二条審査請求人又は参加人は、証拠書類又は証拠物を提出することができる。

Article 32(1)A requestor for review or an intervenor may submit evidence documents or articles of evidence.

２処分庁等は、当該処分の理由となる事実を証する書類その他の物件を提出することができる。

(2)The administrative agency, etc. reaching the disposition may submit documents or other objects proving the facts constituting the grounds for the disposition.

３前二項の場合において、審理員が、証拠書類若しくは証拠物又は書類その他の物件を提出すべき相当の期間を定めたときは、その期間内にこれを提出しなければならない。

(3)In the cases referred to in the preceding two paragraphs, when a review officer has specified a reasonable period of time during which evidence documents or articles of evidence, or documents or other objects should be submitted, they must be submitted within that period of time.

第三十三条審理員は、審査請求人若しくは参加人の申立てにより又は職権で、書類その他の物件の所持人に対し、相当の期間を定めて、その物件の提出を求めることができる。この場合において、審理員は、その提出された物件を留め置くことができる。

Article 33A review officer may, based on a petition by a requestor for review or an intervenor, or by their authority, specify a reasonable period of time and request the possessor of documents or other objects to submit those objects. In such a case, a review officer may keep the submitted objects.

第三十四条審理員は、審査請求人若しくは参加人の申立てにより又は職権で、適当と認める者に、参考人としてその知っている事実の陳述を求め、又は鑑定を求めることができる。

Article 34A review officer may, based on a petition by a requestor for review or an intervenor, or by their authority, request persons they find to be appropriate to state the facts that they know as a witness, or request experts to conduct examinations.

第三十五条審理員は、審査請求人若しくは参加人の申立てにより又は職権で、必要な場所につき、検証をすることができる。

Article 35(1)A review officer may, based on a petition by a requestor for review or an intervenor, or by their authority, conduct a verification at places verification is necessary.

２審理員は、審査請求人又は参加人の申立てにより前項の検証をしようとするときは、あらかじめ、その日時及び場所を当該申立てをした者に通知し、これに立ち会う機会を与えなければならない。

(2)When a review officer intends to conduct a verification referred to in the preceding paragraph based on a petition by a requestor for review or an intervenor, they must inform the date and the place of the verification in advance and provide that person with an opportunity to be present at the verification.

第三十六条審理員は、審査請求人若しくは参加人の申立てにより又は職権で、審査請求に係る事件に関し、審理関係人に質問することができる。

Article 36A review officer may ask questions to persons concerned with proceedings about the case related to the request for review, based on a petition by a requestor for review or an intervenor, or by their authority.

第三十七条審理員は、審査請求に係る事件について、審理すべき事項が多数であり又は錯綜しているなど事件が複雑であることその他の事情により、迅速かつ公正な審理を行うため、第三十一条から前条までに定める審理手続を計画的に遂行する必要があると認める場合には、期日及び場所を指定して、審理関係人を招集し、あらかじめ、これらの審理手続の申立てに関する意見の聴取を行うことができる。

Article 37(1)Regarding the case related to the request for review, if a review officer finds it necessary to perform the procedures for proceedings prescribed in Article 31 through the preceding Article in a well-planned manner in order to conduct prompt and fair proceedings, due to the complexity of the case such as the fact that there are many matters to be examined or that they are entwined, or due to other circumstances, the review officer may designate the date and place to gather the persons concerned with proceedings and hear their opinions on the petition for the procedures for proceedings in advance.

２審理員は、審理関係人が遠隔の地に居住している場合その他相当と認める場合には、政令で定めるところにより、審理員及び審理関係人が音声の送受信により通話をすることができる方法によって、前項に規定する意見の聴取を行うことができる。

(2)When a person concerned with proceedings lives in a remote area or when found to be appropriate, a review officer may conduct hearing of opinions prescribed in the preceding paragraph by a means that enables the review officer and the person concerned with proceedings to communicate with each other by audio transmissions, pursuant to the provisions of Cabinet Order.

３審理員は、前二項の規定による意見の聴取を行ったときは、遅滞なく、第三十一条から前条までに定める審理手続の期日及び場所並びに第四十一条第一項の規定による審理手続の終結の予定時期を決定し、これらを審理関係人に通知するものとする。当該予定時期を変更したときも、同様とする。

(3)When a review officer has conducted the hearing of opinions under the provisions of the preceding two paragraphs, the review officer must decide the date and place of the procedures for proceedings specified in Article 31 through the preceding Article, and the scheduled time when the procedures for proceedings are to be concluded under the provisions of Article 41, paragraph (1), and notify the persons concerned with proceedings of these matters without delay. The same applies when the scheduled time has been changed.

第三十八条審査請求人又は参加人は、第四十一条第一項又は第二項の規定により審理手続が終結するまでの間、審理員に対し、提出書類等（第二十九条第四項各号に掲げる書面又は第三十二条第一項若しくは第二項若しくは第三十三条の規定により提出された書類その他の物件をいう。次項において同じ。）の閲覧（電磁的記録（電子的方式、磁気的方式その他人の知覚によっては認識することができない方式で作られる記録であって、電子計算機による情報処理の用に供されるものをいう。以下同じ。）にあっては、記録された事項を審査庁が定める方法により表示したものの閲覧）又は当該書面若しくは当該書類の写し若しくは当該電磁的記録に記録された事項を記載した書面の交付を求めることができる。この場合において、審理員は、第三者の利益を害するおそれがあると認めるとき、その他正当な理由があるときでなければ、その閲覧又は交付を拒むことができない。

Article 38(1)Until the procedures for proceedings are concluded pursuant to the provisions of Article 41, paragraph (1) or (2), a requestor for review or an intervenor may request a review officer the inspection of the submitted documents, etc. (meaning the documents stated in the items of Article 29, paragraph (4), or the documents or other objects submitted pursuant to the provisions of Article 32, paragraph (1) or (2), or Article 33; the same applies in the following paragraph) (for an electronic or magnetic record (a record made by an electronic method, a magnetic method, or other methods that cannot perceived by the human senses, which is used for information processing by computers; the same applies below), the inspection of a media that displays the matters recorded by the method specified by the reviewing agency), or the delivery of those documents or copies of those documents or a document stating the matters recorded in the electronic or magnetic record. In such a case, the review officer may not refuse the inspection or the delivery of the documents unless it is found that the inspection or the delivery is likely to harm the interest of a third party, or there are other legitimate grounds for refusal.

２審理員は、前項の規定による閲覧をさせ、又は同項の規定による交付をしようとするときは、当該閲覧又は交付に係る提出書類等の提出人の意見を聴かなければならない。ただし、審理員が、その必要がないと認めるときは、この限りでない。

(2)When a review officer intends to enable the inspection under the provisions of the preceding paragraph or the delivery under the provisions of that paragraph, they must hear the opinions of the persons that have submitted the documents, etc. to be inspected or delivered;provided, however, that this does not apply if the review officer finds it unnecessary.

３審理員は、第一項の規定による閲覧について、日時及び場所を指定することができる。

(3)The review officer may specify the date and the place for the inspection under the provisions of paragraph (1).

４第一項の規定による交付を受ける審査請求人又は参加人は、政令で定めるところにより、実費の範囲内において政令で定める額の手数料を納めなければならない。

(4)A requestor for review or an intervenor that receives the delivery under the provisions of paragraph (1) must pay the fees specified by Cabinet Order within an amount not exceeding the actual cost, pursuant to the provisions of Cabinet Order.

５審理員は、経済的困難その他特別の理由があると認めるときは、政令で定めるところにより、前項の手数料を減額し、又は免除することができる。

(5)When a review officer finds that there are financial difficulties or other specific reasons, the review officer may reduce the amount of the fees stated in the preceding paragraph or exempt the relevant person from paying the fees, pursuant to the provisions of Cabinet Order.

６地方公共団体（都道府県、市町村及び特別区並びに地方公共団体の組合に限る。以下同じ。）に所属する行政庁が審査庁である場合における前二項の規定の適用については、これらの規定中「政令」とあるのは、「条例」とし、国又は地方公共団体に所属しない行政庁が審査庁である場合におけるこれらの規定の適用については、これらの規定中「政令で」とあるのは、「審査庁が」とする。

(6)When an administrative agency that belongs to a local government (limited to a prefecture, municipality, and special ward, and an association of local governments; the same applies below) is the reviewing agency, in applying the provisions of the preceding two paragraphs, the term "Cabinet Order" in those provisions are deemed to be replaced with "Prefectural or Municipal Ordinance" and when an administrative agency that does not belong to the national government or a local government is the reviewing agency, in applying those provisions, the term "by Cabinet Order" in those provisions are deemed to be replaced with "by the reviewing agency".

第三十九条審理員は、必要があると認める場合には、数個の審査請求に係る審理手続を併合し、又は併合された数個の審査請求に係る審理手続を分離することができる。

Article 39When finding it necessary, a review officer may consolidate procedures for proceedings for two or more requests for review, or separate procedures for proceedings for two or more requests for review that have been consolidated.

第四十条審理員は、必要があると認める場合には、審査庁に対し、執行停止をすべき旨の意見書を提出することができる。

Article 40When finding it necessary, a review officer may submit a written opinion stating that a stay of enforcement should be granted to the reviewing agency.

第四十一条審理員は、必要な審理を終えたと認めるときは、審理手続を終結するものとする。

Article 41(1)When a review officer finds that necessary proceedings have been completed, the review officer is to conclude the procedures for proceedings.

２前項に定めるもののほか、審理員は、次の各号のいずれかに該当するときは、審理手続を終結することができる。

(2)Beyond what is provided for in the preceding paragraph, a review officer may conclude the procedures for proceedings in any of the following cases:

３審理員が前二項の規定により審理手続を終結したときは、速やかに、審理関係人に対し、審理手続を終結した旨並びに次条第一項に規定する審理員意見書及び事件記録（審査請求書、弁明書その他審査請求に係る事件に関する書類その他の物件のうち政令で定めるものをいう。同条第二項及び第四十三条第二項において同じ。）を審査庁に提出する予定時期を通知するものとする。当該予定時期を変更したときも、同様とする。

(3)When a review officer has concluded procedures for proceedings pursuant to the provisions of the preceding two paragraphs, the review officer is to promptly notify the persons concerned with proceedings the fact that the procedures for proceedings have been concluded, and the scheduled time when the review officer's written opinion prescribed in paragraph (1) of the following Article and the case record (meaning the written request for review, written explanation, and other documents and objects concerning the case related to the request for review, which are specified by Cabinet Order; the same applies in paragraph (2) of the following Article and Article 43, paragraph (2)) are to be submitted to the reviewing agency. The same applies when the scheduled time of submission has been changed.

第四十二条審理員は、審理手続を終結したときは、遅滞なく、審査庁がすべき裁決に関する意見書（以下「審理員意見書」という。）を作成しなければならない。

Article 42(1)When the procedures for proceedings have been concluded, a review officer must prepare a written opinion concerning the administrative determination to be made by the reviewing agency (referred to as a "review officer's written opinion" below) without delay.

２審理員は、審理員意見書を作成したきは、速やかに、これを事件記録とともに、審査庁に提出しなければならない。

(2)When a review officer has prepared a review officer's written opinion, the review officer must promptly submit it to the reviewing agency together with the case record.

第四十三条審査庁は、審理員意見書の提出を受けたときは、次の各号のいずれかに該当する場合を除き、審査庁が主任の大臣又は宮内庁長官若しくは内閣府設置法第四十九条第一項若しくは第二項若しくは国家行政組織法第三条第二項に規定する庁の長である場合にあっては行政不服審査会に、審査庁が地方公共団体の長（地方公共団体の組合にあっては、長、管理者又は理事会）である場合にあっては第八十一条第一項又は第二項の機関に、それぞれ諮問しなければならない。

Article 43(1)When the review agency has received a review officer's written opinion, the reviewing agency that falls under the competent minister, the Grand Steward, or the head of any of the agencies prescribed in Article 49, paragraph (1) or (2) of the Act for Establishment of the Cabinet Office or Article 3, paragraph (2) of the National Government Organization Act must consult with an Administrative Complaint Review Board, and the reviewing agency that falls under the head of a local government (for an association of a local government, the head, manager, or council) must consult with the organs referred to in Article 81, paragraph (1) or (2), in the cases other than those that fall under any of the following case:

２前項の規定による諮問は、審理員意見書及び事件記録の写しを添えてしなければならない。

(2)The consultation under the provisions of the preceding paragraph must be made by attaching copies of the review officer's written opinion and the case record.

３第一項の規定により諮問をした審査庁は、審理関係人（処分庁等が審査庁である場合にあっては、審査請求人及び参加人）に対し、当該諮問をした旨を通知するとともに、審理員意見書の写し送付しなければならない。

(3)The reviewing agency that has consulted with the Administrative Complaint Review Board, etc. pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (1) must notify the persons concerned with proceedings (when the administrative agency, etc. reaching the disposition is the reviewing agency, the requestor for review and the intervenor) the fact that it has consulted the Administrative Complaint Review Board, etc. and send those persons a copy of the review officer's written opinion.

第四十四条審査庁は、行政不服審査会等から諮問に対する答申を受けたとき（前条第一項の規定による諮問を要しない場合（同項第二号又は第三号に該当する場合を除く。）にあっては審理員意見書が提出されたとき、同項第二号又は第三号に該当する場合にあっては同項第二号又は第三号に規定する議を経たとき）は、遅滞なく、裁決をしなければならない。

Article 44When the reviewing agency has received a response to the consultation from the Administrative Complaint Review Board, etc. (if the consultation under the provisions of paragraph (1) of the preceding Article is not necessary (excluding the cases falling under item (ii) or (iii) of that paragraph), when the review officer's written opinion has been submitted, and if the case falls under item (ii) or (iii) of that paragraph, when the case has gone through the deliberations prescribed in item (ii) or (iii) of that paragraph), the reviewing agency must make an administrative determination without delay.

第四十五条処分についての審査請求が法定の期間経過後にされたものである場合その他不適法である場合には、審査庁は、裁決で、当該審査請求を却下する。

Article 45(1)When a request for review of a disposition has been filed after the elapse of the statutory period, or is otherwise unlawful, the reviewing agency is to dismiss the request for review by an administrative determination.

２処分についての審査請求が理由がない場合には、審査庁は、裁決で、当該審査請求を棄却する。

(2)When there are no grounds for a request for review of a disposition, the reviewing agency is to reject the request for review by an administrative determination.

３審査請求に係る処分が違法又は不当ではあるが、これを取り消し、又は撤廃することにより公の利益に著しい障害を生ずる場合において、審査請求人の受ける損害の程度、その損害の賠償又は防止の程度及び方法その他一切の事情を考慮した上、処分を取り消し、又は撤廃することが公共の福祉に適合しないと認めるときは、審査庁は、裁決で、当該審査請求を棄却することができる。この場合には、審査庁は、裁決の主文で、当該処分が違法又は不当であることを宣言しなければならない。

(3)When a disposition related to a request for review is illegal or unjust but its revocation or elimination significantly harms public interest, and the reviewing agency finds that the revocation or elimination of the disposition is not in accordance with public welfare upon considering the extent of damage suffered by the requestor for review, the extent and method of compensation for or prevention of the damage, and all other circumstances, it may dismiss the request for review by an administrative determination . In such a case, the reviewing agency must declare that the disposition is illegal or unjust in the text of the administrative determination.

第四十六条処分（事実上の行為を除く。以下この条及び第四十八条において同じ。）についての審査請求が理由がある場合（前条第三項の規定の適用がある場合を除く。）には、審査庁は、裁決で、当該処分の全部若しくは一部を取り消し、又はこれを変更する。ただし、審査庁が処分庁の上級行政庁又は処分庁のいずれでもない場合には、当該処分を変更することはできない。

Article 46(1)When there are grounds for a request for review of a disposition (excluding de facto acts; the same applies below in this Article and Article 48) (excluding the cases to which the provisions of paragraph (3) of the preceding Article apply), the reviewing agency is to revoke in full or in part the disposition, or change the disposition by an administrative determination;provided, however, that when the reviewing agency is neither the higher administrative agency of the administrative agency reaching the disposition nor the administrative agency reaching the disposition, the reviewing agency may not change the disposition.

２前項の規定により法令に基づく申請を却下し、又は棄却する処分の全部又は一部を取り消す場合において、次の各号に掲げる審査庁は、当該申請に対して一定の処分をすべきものと認めるときは、当該各号に定める措置をとる。

(2)When revoking a disposition to dismiss or reject in full or in part an application based on laws and regulations pursuant to the provisions of the preceding paragraph, the reviewing agency stated in the following items is to take the measures specified in each of those items when it finds that a certain disposition should be rendered for the application:

３前項に規定する一定の処分に関し、第四十三条第一項第一号に規定する議を経るべき旨の定めがある場合において、審査庁が前項各号に定める措置をとるために必要があると認めるときは、審査庁は、当該定めに係る審議会等の議を経ることができる。

(3)When there are provisions providing that a certain disposition prescribed in the preceding paragraph should go through deliberations prescribed in Article 43, paragraph (1), item (i), and the reviewing agency finds it necessary for the purpose of taking the measures specified in the items of the preceding paragraph, the reviewing agency may go through the deliberations at the Council, etc. concerning the provisions.

４前項に規定する定めがある場合のほか、第二項に規定する一定の処分に関し、他の法令に関係行政機関との協議の実施その他の手続をとるべき旨の定めがある場合において、審査庁が同項各号に定める措置をとるために必要があると認めるときは、審査庁は、当該手続をとることができる。

(4)In addition to the cases in which there are provisions prescribed in the preceding paragraph, when other laws and regulations provide that consultation with the relevant administrative agencies or other procedures should be taken for a certain disposition prescribed in paragraph (2), and the reviewing agency finds it necessary for the purpose of taking the measures specified in the items of that paragraph, the reviewing agency may conduct those procedures.

第四十七条事実上の行為についての審査請求が理由がある場合（第四十五条第三項の規定の適用がある場合を除く。）には、審査庁は、裁決で、当該事実上の行為が違法又は不当である旨を宣言するとともに、次の各号に掲げる審査庁の区分に応じ、当該各号に定める措置をとる。ただし、審査庁が処分庁の上級行政庁以外の審査庁である場合には、当該事実上の行為を変更すべき旨を命ずることはできない。

Article 47When there are grounds for a request for review of a de facto act (excluding the cases to which the provisions of Article 45, paragraph (3) apply), the reviewing agency is to declare that the de facto act is illegal or unjust by an administrative determination, and take the measures specified in the following items in accordance with the category of the reviewing agencies stated in each of those items;provided, however, that when the reviewing agency is a reviewing agency other than the higher administrative agency of the administrative agency reaching the disposition, the reviewing agency may not order that the de facto act should be changed:

第四十八条第四十六条第一項本文又は前条の場合において、審査庁は、審査請求人の不利益に当該処分を変更し、又は当該事実上の行為を変更すべき旨を命じ、若しくはこれを変更することはできない。

Article 48In the case referred to in the main clause of Article 46, paragraph (1) or the preceding Article, the reviewing agency may not make a change to the disposition, or order the de facto act to be changed or change the de facto act, in a manner that is disadvantageous to requestor for review.

第四十九条不作為についての審査請求が当該不作為に係る処分についての申請から相当の期間が経過しないでされたものである場合その他不適法である場合には、審査庁は、裁決で、当該審査請求を却下する。

Article 49(1)When a request for review regarding inaction has been filed before the elapse of a reasonable period of time after an application for the disposition of inaction has been filed, or the request is otherwise unlawful, the reviewing agency is to dismiss the request for review by a decision.

２不作為についての審査請求が理由がない場合には、審査庁は、裁決で、当該審査請求を棄却する。

(2)When there are no grounds for a request for review regarding to inaction, the reviewing agency is to reject the request for review by an administrative determination.

３不作為についての審査請求が理由がある場合には、審査庁は、裁決で、当該不作為が違法又は不当である旨を宣言する。この場合において、次の各号に掲げる審査庁は、当該申請に対して一定の処分をすべきものと認めるときは、当該各号に定める措置をとる。

(3)When there are grounds for a request for review regarding inaction, the reviewing agency is to declare that the inaction is illegal or unjust by an administrative determination. In such a case, when the reviewing agency stated in the following items finds that a certain disposition should be rendered for the application, the reviewing agency stated in the following items is to take the measures specified in each of those items:

４審査請求に係る不作為に係る処分に関し、第四十三条第一項第一号に規定する議を経るべき旨の定めがある場合において、審査庁が前項各号に定める措置をとるために必要があると認めるときは、審査庁は、当該定めに係る審議会等の議を経ることができる。

(4)When there are provisions providing that the disposition of inaction related to a request for review should go through deliberations prescribed in Article 43, paragraph (1), item (i), and the reviewing agency finds it necessary for the purpose of taking the measures specified in the items of the preceding paragraph, the reviewing agency may go through deliberations at the Council, etc. related to the provisions.

５前項に規定する定めがある場合のほか、審査請求に係る不作為に係る処分に関し、他の法令に関係行政機関との協議の実施その他の手続をとるべき旨の定めがある場合において、審査庁が第三項各号に定める措置をとるために必要があると認めるときは、審査庁は、当該手続をとることができる。

(5)In addition to the cases in which there are provisions prescribed in the preceding paragraph, when other laws and regulations provide that consultation with the relevant administrative agencies should be conducted and other procedures should be conducted regarding the disposition of inaction related to the request for review, and the reviewing agency finds it necessary for the purpose of taking the measures specified in the items of paragraph (3), the reviewing agency may conduct those procedures.

第五十条裁決は、次に掲げる事項を記載し、審査庁が記名押印した裁決書によりしなければならない。

Article 50(1)A decision must be made using a written administrative determination stating the following matters and on which the reviewing agency has affixed its name and seal:

２第四十三条第一項の規定による行政不服審査会等への諮問を要しない場合には、前項の裁決書には、審理員意見書を添付しなければならない。

(2)When consultation with the Administrative Complaint Review Board, etc. pursuant to the provisions of Article 43, paragraph (1) is not necessary, the review officer's written opinion must be attached to the written administrative determination referred to in the preceding paragraph.

３審査庁は、再審査請求をすることができる裁決をする場合には、裁決書に再審査請求をすることができる旨並びに再審査請求をすべき行政庁及び再審査請求期間（第六十二条に規定する期間をいう。）を記載して、これらを教示しなければならない。

(3)When making an administrative determination for which a request for re-examination may be filed, the reviewing agency must state the fact that a request for re-examination may be filed, and an administrative agency with which a request for re-examination should be filed and the period for filing a request for re-examination (meaning the period of time prescribed in Article 62) in a written administrative determination to inform the relevant person of these matters.

第五十一条裁決は、審査請求人（当該審査請求が処分の相手方以外の者のしたものである場合における第四十六条第一項及び第四十七条の規定による裁決にあっては、審査請求人及び処分の相手方）に送達された時に、その効力を生ずる。

Article 51(1)An administrative determination comes into effect when it is served to the requestor for review (for an administrative determination made under the provisions of Article 46, paragraph (1) and Article 47 when the request for review has been filed by a person other than the party subject to the disposition, the requestor for review and the party subject to the disposition).

２裁決の送達は、送達を受けるべき者に裁決書の謄本を送付することによってする。ただし、送達を受けるべき者の所在が知れない場合その他裁決書の謄本を送付することができない場合には、公示の方法によってすることができる。

(2)The service of an administrative determination is to be made by sending a transcript of the written administrative determination to the person to who is to be served the administrative determination;provided, however, that if the whereabouts of the person who is to be served the administrative determination are unknown or if it is not possible to send a transcript of the written administrative determination, the service of the administrative determination may be made by means of public notice.

３公示の方法による送達は、審査庁が裁決書の謄本を保管し、いつでもその送達を受けるべき者に交付する旨を総務省令で定める方法により不特定多数の者が閲覧することができる状態に置くとともに、その旨が記載された書面を当該審査庁の事務所の掲示場に掲示し、又はその旨を当該事務所に設置した電子計算機の映像面に表示したものの閲覧をすることができる状態に置く措置をとることにより行うものとする。この場合において、当該措置を開始した日の翌日から起算して二週間を経過した時に裁決書の謄本の送付があったものとみなす。

(3)The service of the administrative determination by means of public notice is to be made by the reviewing agency keeping the transcript of the written administrative determination and in a manner that enables an unspecified and large number of persons to inspect the fact that the transcript will be delivered to the person who is to receive the service at any time by the means specified by Order of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communication, and by taking the measures to post a document stating that fact on the notice board in the office of the reviewing agency or to enable the inspection of that fact displayed on a screen of a computer installed at the office. In such a case, the transcript of the written administrative determination is deemed to be served at the time when two weeks have passed from the day following the day on which the measures have been initiated.

４審査庁は、裁決書の謄本を参加人及び処分庁等（審査庁以外の処分庁等に限る。）に送付しなければならない。

(4)The reviewing agency must send a transcript of the written administrative determination to the intervenors and the administrative agency, etc. reaching the disposition (limited to the administrative agency, etc. reaching the disposition other than the reviewing agency).

第五十二条裁決は、関係行政庁を拘束する。

Article 52(1)An administrative determination binds the relevant administrative agencies.

２申請に基づいてした処分が手続の違法若しくは不当を理由として裁決で取り消され、又は申請を却下し、若しくは棄却した処分が裁決で取り消された場合には、処分庁は、裁決の趣旨に従い、改めて申請に対する処分をしなければならない。

(2)When a disposition rendered based on an application has been revoked by an administrative determination on the grounds of procedural illegality or unfairness, or a disposition to dismiss or reject an application has been revoked by an administrative determination, the administrative agency reaching the disposition must once again render a disposition for the application in accordance with the purport of the administrative determination.

３法令の規定により公示された処分が裁決で取り消され、又は変更された場合には、処分庁は、当該処分が取り消され、又は変更された旨を公示しなければならない。

(3)When a disposition that has been given a publicly notice pursuant to the provisions of laws and regulations has been revoked or changed by an administrative determination, the administrative agency reaching the disposition must give public notice of the fact that the disposition has been revoked or changed.

４法令の規定により処分の相手方以外の利害関係人に通知された処分が裁決で取り消され、又は変更された場合には、処分庁は、その通知を受けた者（審査請求人及び参加人を除く。）に、当該処分が取り消され、又は変更された旨を通知しなければならない。

(4)When a disposition which was notified to an interested person other than the party subject to the disposition pursuant to the provisions of laws and regulations has been revoked or changed by an administrative determination, the administrative agency reaching the disposition must notify the person who has received the notice (excluding the requestor for review and the intervenors) the fact that the disposition has been revoked or changed.

第五十三条審査庁は、裁決をしたときは、速やかに、第三十二条第一項又は第二項の規定により提出された証拠書類若しくは証拠物又は書類その他の物件及び第三十三条の規定による提出要求に応じて提出された書類その他の物件をその提出人に返還しなければならない。

Article 53When the reviewing agency has made an administrative determination, it must promptly return the evidence documents or articles of evidence, or documents or other objects submitted pursuant to the provisions of Article 32, paragraph (1) or (2), and the documents or other objects submitted in response to a request for submission under the provisions of Article 33 to the person who submitted them.

第五十四条再調査の請求は、処分があったことを知った日の翌日から起算して三月を経過したときは、することができない。ただし、正当な理由があるときは、この限りでない。

Article 54(1)A request for re-investigation may not be filed after three months have passed from the day following the day on which the person comes to know that the disposition has been rendered;provided, however, that this does not apply if there are legitimate grounds.

２再調査の請求は、処分があった日の翌日から起算して一年を経過したときは、することができない。ただし、正当な理由があるときは、この限りでない。

(2)A request for re-investigation may not be filed after one year has passed from the day following the day on which the disposition has been rendered;provided, however, that this does not apply if there are legitimate grounds.

第五十五条再調査の請求をすることができる処分につき、処分庁が誤って再調査の請求をすることができる旨を教示しなかった場合において、審査請求がされた場合であって、審査請求人から申立てがあったときは、審査庁は、速やかに、審査請求書又は審査請求録取書を処分庁に送付しなければならない。ただし、審査請求人に対し弁明書が送付された後においては、この限りでない。

Article 55(1)Regarding a disposition for which a request for re-investigation may be filed, when the administrative agency reaching the disposition has erroneously failed to inform a person that a request for re-investigation may be filed, and the person has filed a request for review and the requestor for review has filed a petition, the reviewing agency must promptly send the written request for review or written statement concerning the request for review to the administrative agency reaching the disposition;provided, however, that this does not apply after a written explanation has been sent to the requestor for review.

２前項本文の規定により審査請求書又は審査請求録取書の送付を受けた処分庁は、速やかに、その旨を審査請求人及び参加人に通知しなければならない。

(2)The administrative agency reaching the disposition that has received the written request for review or written statement concerning the request for review pursuant to the provisions of the main clause of the preceding paragraph must promptly notify that fact to the requestor for review and the intervenors.

３第一項本文の規定により審査請求書又は審査請求録取書が処分庁に送付されたときは、初めから処分庁に再調査の請求がされたものとみなす。

(3)When the written request for review or written statement concerning the request for review has been sent to the administrative agency reaching the disposition pursuant to the provisions of the main clause of paragraph (1), the request for re-investigation is deemed to have been filed with the administrative agency reaching the dispositionin the first place.

第五十六条第五条第二項ただし書の規定により審査請求がされたときは、同項の再調査の請求は、取り下げられたものとみなす。ただし、処分庁において当該審査請求がされた日以前に再調査の請求に係る処分（事実上の行為を除く。）を取り消す旨の第六十条第一項の決定書の謄本を発している場合又は再調査の請求に係る事実上の行為を撤廃している場合は、当該審査請求（処分（事実上の行為を除く。）の一部を取り消す旨の第五十九条第一項の決定がされている場合又は事実上の行為の一部が撤廃されている場合にあっては、その部分に限る。）が取り下げられたものとみなす。

Article 56When a request for review has been filed pursuant to the provisions of the proviso to Article 5, paragraph (2), the request for re-investigation referred to in that paragraph is deemed to have been withdrawn;provided, however, that when the administrative agency reaching the disposition has sent a transcript of the written decision referred to in Article 60, paragraph (1) of the fact that the disposition (excluding de facto acts) related to the request for re-investigation is to be revoked, or when de facto acts related to the request for re-investigation have been repealed, before the day on which the request for review was filed with the administrative agency reaching the disposition, the request for review in question (when a decision referred to in Article 59, paragraph (1) to revoke in part the disposition (excluding de facto acts) has been made or de facto acts have been repealed in part, limited to that part) is deemed to have been withdrawn.

第五十七条処分庁は、再調査の請求がされた日（第六十一条において読み替えて準用する第二十三条の規定により不備を補正すべきことを命じた場合にあっては、当該不備が補正された日）の翌日から起算して三月を経過しても当該再調査の請求が係属しているときは、遅滞なく、当該処分について直ちに審査請求をすることができる旨を書面でその再調査の請求人に教示しなければならない。

Article 57When a request for re-investigation is still pending even after three months have passed from the day following the day on which the request for re-investigation was filed (when the administrative agency reaching the disposition ordered the requestor to correct a defect pursuant to the provisions of Article 23 as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 61 following the deemed replacement of terms, the day on which the defect was corrected), the administrative agency reaching the disposition must inform the requestor for re-investigation in writing that a request for review may be immediately filed for the disposition.

第五十八条再調査の請求が法定の期間経過後にされたものである場合その他不適法である場合には、処分庁は、決定で、当該再調査の請求を却下する。

Article 58(1)When a request for re-investigation has been filed after the statutory period has passed, or is otherwise unlawful, the administrative agency reaching the disposition is to dismiss the request for re-investigation by a decision.

２再調査の請求が理由がない場合には、処分庁は、決定で、当該再調査の請求を棄却する。

(2)When there are no grounds for a request for re-investigation, the administrative agency reaching the disposition is to reject the request for re-investigation by a decision.

第五十九条処分（事実上の行為を除く。）についての再調査の請求が理由がある場合には、処分庁は、決定で、当該処分の全部若しくは一部を取り消し、又はこれを変更する。

Article 59(1)When there are grounds for a request for re-investigation concerning a disposition (excluding de facto acts), the administrative agency reaching the disposition is to revoke the disposition in full or in part or change the disposition by a decision.

２事実上の行為についての再調査の請求が理由がある場合には、処分庁は、決定で、当該事実上の行為が違法又は不当である旨を宣言するとともに、当該事実上の行為の全部若しくは一部を撤廃し、又はこれを変更する。

(2)When there are grounds for a request for re-investigation concerning de facto acts, the administrative agency reaching the disposition is to declare the fact that the de facto acts are illegal or unjust and repeal the de facto acts in full or in part or change the de facto acts by a decision.

３処分庁は、前二項の場合において、再調査の請求人の不利益に当該処分又は当該事実上の行為を変更することはできない。

(3)In the cases referred to in the preceding two paragraphs, the administrative agency reaching the disposition may not change the disposition or de facto acts in a manner disadvantageous to the requestor for re-investigation.

第六十条前二条の決定は、主文及び理由を記載し、処分庁が記名押印した決定書によりしなければならない。

Article 60(1)A decision referred to in the preceding two Articles must be made using a written decision stating the text and the reasons and on which the administrative agency reaching the disposition has affixed its name and seal.

２処分庁は、前項の決定書（再調査の請求に係る処分の全部を取り消し、又は撤廃する決定に係るものを除く。）に、再調査の請求に係る処分につき審査請求をすることができる旨（却下の決定である場合にあっては、当該却下の決定が違法な場合に限り審査請求をすることができる旨）並びに審査請求をすべき行政庁及び審査請求期間を記載して、これらを教示しなければならない。

(2)The administrative agency reaching the disposition must state the fact that a request for review may be filed for a disposition of the request for re-investigation in the written decision referred to in the preceding paragraph (excluding a written decision on revoking or eliminating in full the disposition related to the request for re-investigation) (for a decision to dismiss the request, the fact that a request for review may be filed only when the decision of dismissal is illegal), an administrative agency with which a request for review should be filed, and the period for filing a request for review to inform the relevant person of these matters.

第六十一条第九条第四項、第十条から第十六条まで、第十八条第三項、第十九条（第三項並びに第五項第一号及び第二号を除く。）、第二十条、第二十三条、第二十四条、第二十五条（第三項を除く。）、第二十六条、第二十七条、第三十一条（第五項を除く。）、第三十二条（第二項を除く。）、第三十九条、第五十一条及び第五十三条の規定は、再調査の請求について準用する。この場合において、別表第二の上欄に掲げる規定中同表の中欄に掲げる字句は、それぞれ同表の下欄に掲げる字句に読み替えるものとする。

Article 61The provisions of Article 9, paragraph (4), Article 10 through Article 16, Article 18, paragraph (3), Article 19 (excluding paragraph (3) and paragraph (5), items (i) and (ii)), Article 20, Article 23, Article 24, Article 25 (excluding paragraph (3)), Article 26, Article 27, Article 31 (excluding paragraph (5)), Article 32 (excluding paragraph (2)), Article 39, Article 51, and Article 53 apply mutatis mutandis to requests for re-investigation. In such a case, in the provisions stated in the left-hand column of Appended Table 2, the terms stated in the middle column of that Table are deemed to be replaced with the terms stated in the right-hand column of that Table.

第六十二条再審査請求は、原裁決があったことを知った日の翌日から起算して一月を経過したときは、することができない。ただし、正当な理由があるときは、この限りでない。

Article 62(1)A request for re-examination may not be filed after one month has passed from the day following the day on which the relevant person has come to know that the original administrative determination was made;provided, however, that this does not apply when there are legitimate grounds.

２再審査請求は、原裁決があった日の翌日から起算して一年を経過したときは、することができない。ただし、正当な理由があるときは、この限りでない。

(2)A request for re-examination may not be filed after one year has passed from the day following the day on which the original administrative determination was made;provided, however, that this does not apply when there are legitimate grounds.

第六十三条第六十六条第一項において読み替えて準用する第十一条第二項に規定する審理員又は第六十六条第一項において準用する第九条第一項各号に掲げる機関である再審査庁（他の法律の規定により再審査請求がされた行政庁（第六十六条第一項において読み替えて準用する第十四条の規定により引継ぎを受けた行政庁を含む。）をいう。以下同じ。）は、原裁決をした行政庁に対し、原裁決に係る裁決書の送付を求めるものとする。

Article 63The review officer prescribed in Article 11, paragraph (2) as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 66, paragraph (1) following the deemed replacement of terms or the re-examining agency (meaning an administrative agency with which a request for re-examination has been filed pursuant to the provisions of other laws (including an administrative agency that has taken over the case pursuant to the provisions of Article 14 as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 66, paragraph (1) following the deemed replacement of terms); the same applies below) that is an organ stated in the items of Article 9, paragraph (1) as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 66, paragraph (1) is to request the administrative agency that has made the original administrative determination to send the written administrative determination for the original administrative determination.

第六十四条再審査請求が法定の期間経過後にされたものである場合その他不適法である場合には、再審査庁は、裁決で、当該再審査請求を却下する。

Article 64(1)When a request for re-examination has been filed after the statutory period has passed, or is otherwise unlawful, the re-examining agency is to dismiss the request for re-examination by an administrative determination.

２再審査請求が理由がない場合には、再審査庁は、裁決で、当該再審査請求を棄却する。

(2)When there are no grounds for a request for re-examination, the re-examining agency is to reject the request for re-examination by an administrative determination.

３再審査請求に係る原裁決（審査請求を却下し、又は棄却したものに限る。）が違法又は不当である場合において、当該審査請求に係る処分が違法又は不当のいずれでもないときは、再審査庁は、裁決で、当該再審査請求を棄却する。

(3)When the original administrative determination related to a request for re-examination (limited to an administrative determination that has dismissed or rejected a request for review) is illegal or unjust and the disposition of the request for review is neither illegal nor unjust, the re-examining agency is to reject the request for re-examination by an administrative determination.

４前項に規定する場合のほか、再審査請求に係る原裁決等が違法又は不当ではあるが、これを取り消し、又は撤廃することにより公の利益に著しい障害を生ずる場合において、再審査請求人の受ける損害の程度、その損害の賠償又は防止の程度及び方法その他一切の事情を考慮した上、原裁決等を取り消し、又は撤廃することが公共の福祉に適合しないと認めるときは、再審査庁は、裁決で、当該再審査請求を棄却することができる。この場合には、再審査庁は、裁決の主文で、当該原裁決等が違法又は不当であることを宣言しなければならない。

(4)Beyond what is prescribed in the preceding paragraph, when the original administrative determination, etc. related to a request for re-examination is illegal or unjust and revoking or eliminating will significantly harm public interest, and the re-examining agency finds that the revocation or elimination of the original administrative determination, etc. is not in accordance with public welfare upon considering the extent of damage to be sustained by the requestor for re-examination, the extent and method of compensation for or prevention of the damage, and all other circumstances, the re-examining agency may reject the request for re-examination by an administrative determination. In such a case, the re-examining agency must declare that the original administrative determination, etc. is illegal or unjust in the main text of the administrative determination.

第六十五条原裁決等（事実上の行為を除く。）についての再審査請求が理由がある場合（前条第三項に規定する場合及び同条第四項の規定の適用がある場合を除く。）には、再審査庁は、裁決で、当該原裁決等の全部又は一部を取り消す。

Article 65(1)When there are grounds for a request for re-examination related to the original administrative determination, etc. (excluding de facto acts) (excluding the cases prescribed in paragraph (3) of the preceding Article and the those to which the provisions of paragraph (4) of that Article apply), the re-examining agency is to revoke the original administrative determination, etc. in full or in part by an administrative determination.

２事実上の行為についての再審査請求が理由がある場合（前条第四項の規定の適用がある場合を除く。）には、裁決で、当該事実上の行為が違法又は不当である旨を宣言するとともに、処分庁に対し、当該事実上の行為の全部又は一部を撤廃すべき旨を命ずる。

(2)When there are grounds for a request for re-examination related to de facto acts (excluding the cases to which the provisions of paragraph (4) of the preceding Article apply), the re-examining agency is to declare that the de facto acts are illegal or unjust in the administrative determination, and order the administrative agency reaching the disposition to eliminate the de facto acts in full or in part.

第六十六条第二章（第九条第三項、第十八条（第三項を除く。）、第十九条第三項並びに第五項第一号及び第二号、第二十二条、第二十五条第二項、第二十九条（第一項を除く。）、第三十条第一項、第四十一条第二項第一号イ及びロ、第四節、第四十五条から第四十九条まで並びに第五十条第三項を除く。）の規定は、再審査請求について準用する。この場合において、別表第三の上欄に掲げる規定中同表の中欄に掲げる字句は、それぞれ同表の下欄に掲げる字句に読み替えるものとする。

Article 66(1)The provisions of Chapter II (excluding Article 9, paragraph (3), Article 18 (excluding paragraph (3)), Article 19, paragraph (3) and paragraph (5), items (i) and (ii), Article 22, Article 25, paragraph (2), Article 29 (excluding paragraph (1)), Article 30, paragraph (1), Article 41, paragraph (2), item (i), sub-items (a) and (b), Section 4, Article 45 through Article 49, and Article 50, paragraph (3)) apply mutatis mutandis to requests for re- examination. In such a case, in the provisions stated in the left-hand column of Appended Table 3, the terms stated in the middle column of that Table are deemed to be replaced with the terms stated in the right-hand column of that Table.

２再審査庁が前項において準用する第九条第一項各号に掲げる機関である場合には、前項において準用する第十七条、第四十条、第四十二条及び第五十条第二項の規定は、適用しない。

(2)When the re-examining agency is an organ stated in the items of Article 9, paragraph (1) as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to the preceding paragraph, the provisions of Article 17, Article 40, Article 42, and Article 50, paragraph (2) as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to the preceding paragraph do not apply.

第六十七条総務省に、行政不服審査会（以下「審査会」という。）を置く。

Article 67(1)The Administrative Complaint Review Board (referred to as "the Board" below) is established in the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications.

２審査会は、この法律の規定によりその権限に属させられた事項を処理する。

(2)The Board is to administer matters that have been placed under its authorization pursuant to the provisions of this Act.

第六十八条審査会は、委員九人をもって組織する。

Article 68(1)The Board consists of nine Board members.

２委員は、非常勤とする。ただし、そのうち三人以内は、常勤とすることができる。

(2)The Board members serve on a part-time basis;provided, however, a maximum of three persons may serve on a full-time basis.

第六十九条委員は、審査会の権限に属する事項に関し公正な判断をすることができ、かつ、法律又は行政に関して優れた識見を有する者のうちから、両議院の同意を得て、総務大臣が任命する。

Article 69(1)The Board members are to be appointed by the Minister of Internal Affairs and Communications, with the consent of both Houses of the Diet, from among the persons who are capable of making a fair judgment on the matters under the authority of the Board and have excellent insight into law or administration.

２委員の任期が満了し、又は欠員を生じた場合において、国会の閉会又は衆議院の解散のために両議院の同意を得ることができないときは、総務大臣は、前項の規定にかかわらず、同項に定める資格を有する者のうちから、委員を任命することができる。

(2)When the term of office of a Board member expires or a vacancy occurs and the consent of both Houses of the Diet cannot be obtained because the Diet is out of session or the dissolution of the House of Representatives, the Minister of Internal Affairs and Communications may appoint a Board member from among the persons who have qualifications prescribed in the preceding paragraph, notwithstanding the provisions of that paragraph.

３前項の場合においては、任命後最初の国会で両議院の事後の承認を得なければならない。この場合において、両議院の事後の承認が得られないときは、総務大臣は、直ちにその委員を罷免しなければならない。

(3)In the case referred to in the preceding paragraph, the subsequent approval of both Houses of the Diet must be obtained in the first session of the Diet after the appointment. In such a case, when the subsequent approval of both Houses of the Diet may not be obtained, the Minister of Internal Affairs and Communications must dismiss that Board member.

４委員の任期は、三年とする。ただし、補欠の委員の任期は、前任者の残任期間とする。

(4)The term of office of a Board member is to be three years;provided, however, that the term of office of a Board member appointed to fill a vacancy is to be the remaining term of office of the predecessor.

５委員は、再任されることができる。

(5)A Board member may be reappointed.

６委員の任期が満了したときは、当該委員は、後任者が任命されるまで引き続きその職務を行うものとする。

(6)When the term of office of a Board member has expired, the Board member is to continue to perform their duties until the successor is appointed.

７総務大臣は、委員が心身の故障のために職務の執行ができないと認める場合又は委員に職務上の義務違反その他委員たるに適しない非行があると認める場合には、両議院の同意を得て、その委員を罷免することができる。

(7)When the Minister of Internal Affairs and Communications finds that a Board member is incapable of performing their duties due to mental or physical disorder or has committed a violation of obligations in the course of duties or other malfeasance unsuitable for a Board member, the Minister may dismiss that Board member, with the consent of both Houses of the Diet.

８委員は、職務上知ることができた秘密を漏らしてはならない。その職を退いた後も同様とする。

(8)A Board member must not disclose any confidential information that they have learned in the course of duties. The same applies even after leaving their post.

９委員は、在任中、政党その他の政治的団体の役員となり、又は積極的に政治運動をしてはならない。

(9)While in office, a Board member must not serve as an officer of a political party or other political bodies, or actively engage in political activities.

１０常勤の委員は、在任中、総務大臣の許可がある場合を除き、報酬を得て他の職務に従事し、又は営利事業を営み、その他金銭上の利益を目的とする業務を行ってはならない。

(10)Full-time board members must not engage in other jobs with remuneration, perform commercial business, or operate other businesses for monetary profit while in office, unless permitted by the Minister of Internal Affairs and Communications.

１１委員の給与は、別に法律で定める。

(11)The remuneration of the board members is specified separately by law.

第七十条審査会に、会長を置き、委員の互選により選任する。

Article 70(1)The Board is to have a chairperson, who is to be elected from among the Board members.

２会長は、会務を総理し、審査会を代表する。

(2)The chairperson presides over the affairs of the Board and represents the Board.

３会長に事故があるときは、あらかじめその指名する委員が、その職務を代理する。

(3)If the chairperson is unavailable, a Board member appointed in advance performs the chairperson's duties.

第七十一条審査会に、専門の事項を調査させるため、専門委員を置くことができる。

Article 71(1)The Board may have expert advisors to have them investigate technical matters.

２専門委員は、学識経験のある者のうちから、総務大臣が任命する。

(2)Expert advisors are to be appointed by the Minister of Internal Affairs and Communications from among persons with relevant expertise.

３専門委員は、その者の任命に係る当該専門の事項に関する調査が終了したときは、解任されるものとする。

(3)When the investigation on the technical matters related to the appointment of an expert advisor has been completed, the expert advisor is to be dismissed.

４専門委員は、非常勤とする。

(4)An expert advisor serves on a part-time basis.

第七十二条審査会は、委員のうちから、審査会が指名する者三人をもって構成する合議体で、審査請求に係る事件について調査審議する。

Article 72(1)A panel consisting of three persons nominated by the Board from among the Board members investigates and deliberates cases related to a request for review.

２前項の規定にかかわらず、審査会が定める場合においては、委員の全員をもって構成する合議体で、審査請求に係る事件について調査審議する。

(2)Notwithstanding the provisions of the preceding paragraph, in the case specified by the Board, a panel consisting of all Board members investigates and deliberates cases related to a request for review.

第七十三条審査会の事務を処理させるため、審査会に事務局を置く。

Article 73(1)The Board is to establish a secretariat for the purpose of having the secretariat deal with the affairs of the board.

２事務局に、事務局長のほか、所要の職員を置く。

(2)The secretariat has a secretary general and other necessary employees.

３事務局長は、会長の命を受けて、局務を掌理する。

(3)The secretary general administers the affairs of the secretariat under the order of the chairperson.

第七十四条審査会は、必要があると認める場合には、審査請求に係る事件に関し、審査請求人、参加人又は第四十三条第一項の規定により審査会に諮問をした審査庁（以下この款において「審査関係人」という。）にその主張を記載した書面（以下この款において「主張書面」という。）又は資料の提出を求めること、適当と認める者にその知っている事実の陳述又は鑑定を求めることその他必要な調査をすることができる。

Article 74When finding it necessary, the Board may request the requestor for review, the intervenors, or the reviewing agency that has consulted with the Board pursuant to the provisions of Article 43, paragraph (1) (referred to as the "persons concerned with the review" below in this Subsection) to submit a document stating their allegation (referred to as "written statement of allegations" below in this subsection) or other materials, request a person found appropriate to state the facts that they know, or seek expert opinions, or otherwise conduct necessary investigations.

第七十五条審査会は、審査関係人の申立てがあった場合には、当該審査関係人に口頭で意見を述べる機会を与えなければならない。ただし、審査会が、その必要がないと認める場合には、この限りでない。

Article 75(1)When a person concerned with the review has filed a petition, the Board must give the person concerned with the review an opportunity to orally state opinions;provided, however, that this does not apply if the Board finds it unnecessary.

２前項本文の場合において、審査請求人又は参加人は、審査会の許可を得て、補佐人とともに出頭することができる。

(2)In the case referred to in the main clause of the preceding paragraph, a requestor for review or an intervenor may appear in court together with an assistant by obtaining permission from the Board.

第七十六条審査関係人は、審査会に対し、主張書面又は資料を提出することができる。この場合において、審査会が、主張書面又は資料を提出すべき相当の期間を定めたときは、その期間内にこれを提出しなければならない。

Article 76A person concerned with the review may submit a written statement of allegations or materials to the Board. In such a case, when the Board has specified a reasonable period of time during which a written statement of allegations or materials should be submitted, the person must submit them within that period of time.

第七十七条審査会は、必要があると認める場合には、その指名する委員に、第七十四条の規定による調査をさせ、又は第七十五条第一項本文の規定による審査関係人の意見の陳述を聴かせることができる。

Article 77When finding it necessary, the Board may have a Board member it has nominated conduct an investigation under the provisions of Article 74 or hear the opinions of the persons concerned with the review under the provisions of the main clause of Article 75, paragraph (1).

第七十八条審査関係人は、審査会に対し、審査会に提出された主張書面若しくは資料の閲覧（電磁的記録にあっては、記録された事項を審査会が定める方法により表示したものの閲覧）又は当該主張書面若しくは当該資料の写し若しくは当該電磁的記録に記録された事項を記載した書面の交付を求めることができる。この場合において、審査会は、第三者の利益を害するおそれがあると認めるとき、その他正当な理由があるときでなければ、その閲覧又は交付を拒むことができない。

Article 78(1)The persons concerned with the review may request the Board the inspection of a written statement of allegations or materials submitted to the Board (for an electronic or magnetic record, the inspection of a media that displays the matters recorded by the method specified by the Board), or the delivery of copies of the written statement of allegations or materials, or a document stating the matters recorded in the electronic or magnetic record. In such a case, the Board may not refuse the inspection or the delivery of the documents unless it is found that the inspection or the delivery is likely to harm the interest of a third party, or there are other legitimate grounds for refusal.

２審査会は、前項の規定による閲覧をさせ、又は同項の規定による交付をしようとするときは、当該閲覧又は交付に係る主張書面又は資料の提出人の意見を聴かなければならない。ただし、審査会が、その必要がないと認めるときは、この限りでない。

(2)When the Board intends to enable the inspection under the provisions of the preceding paragraph or the delivery under the provisions of that paragraph, the Board must hear the opinions of the persons that have submitted the written statements of allegations or materials to be inspected or delivered;provided, however, that this does not apply if the Board finds it unnecessary.

３審査会は、第一項の規定による閲覧について、日時及び場所を指定することができる。

(3)The board may designate the date of and the place for the inspection under the provisions of paragraph (1).

４第一項の規定による交付を受ける審査請求人又は参加人は、政令で定めるところにより、実費の範囲内において政令で定める額の手数料を納めなければならない。

(4)A requestor for review or an intervenor who receives the delivery under the provisions of paragraph (1) must pay the fees specified by Cabinet Order within an amount not exceeding the actual cost, pursuant to the provisions of Cabinet Order.

５審査会は、経済的困難その他特別の理由があると認めるときは、政令で定めるところにより、前項の手数料を減額し、又は免除することができる。

(5)When the Board finds that there are financial difficulties or other specific reasons, it may reduce the amount of the fees stated in the preceding paragraph or exempt the relevant person from paying the fees, pursuant to the provisions of Cabinet Order.

第七十九条審査会は、諮問に対する答申をしたときは、答申書の写しを審査請求人及び参加人に送付するとともに、答申の内容を公表するものとする。

Article 79When the board has responded to a consultation, the Board is to send a copy of the written response to the requestor for review and the intervenors, and publicize the content of the response.

第八十条この法律に定めるもののほか、審査会に関し必要な事項は、政令で定める。

Article 80Beyond what is provided for in this Act, necessary matters concerning the Board are provided for by Cabinet Order.

第八十一条地方公共団体に、執行機関の附属機関として、この法律の規定によりその権限に属させられた事項を処理するための機関を置く。

Article 81(1)A local government establishes an organ for dealing with the matters that have been placed under its authority pursuant to the provisions of this Act as an organ affiliated to its executive agencies.

２前項の規定にかかわらず、地方公共団体は、当該地方公共団体における不服申立ての状況等に鑑み同項の機関を置くことが不適当又は困難であるときは、条例で定めるところにより、事件ごとに、執行機関の附属機関として、この法律の規定によりその権限に属させられた事項を処理するための機関を置くこととすることができる。

(2)Notwithstanding the provisions of the preceding paragraph, when it is inappropriate or difficult to establish an organ referred to in that paragraph in view of the situation of complaints filed in the local government, a local government may establish an organ for dealing with the matters that have been placed under its authority pursuant to the provisions of this Act as an organ affiliated to its executive agencies for each case, pursuant to the provisions of Prefectural or Municipal Ordinance.

３前節第二款の規定は、前二項の機関について準用する。この場合において、第七十八条第四項及び第五項中「政令」とあるのは、「条例」と読み替えるものとする。

(3)The provisions of Subsection 2 of the preceding Section apply mutatis mutandis to the organs referred to in the preceding two paragraphs. In such a case, the term "Cabinet Order" in Article 78, paragraphs (4) and (5) is deemed to be replaced with "Prefectural or Municipal Ordinance".

４前三項に定めるもののほか、第一項又は第二項の機関の組織及び運営に関し必要な事項は、当該機関を置く地方公共団体の条例（地方自治法第二百五十二条の七第一項の規定により共同設置する機関にあっては、同項の規約）で定める。

(4)Beyond what is provided for in the preceding three paragraphs, necessary matters concerning the organization and operation of the organs referred to in paragraphs (1) or (2) are provided for by Ordinance of the local government in which the organ is established (for an organ jointly established pursuant to the provisions of Article 252-7, paragraph (1) of the Local Autonomy Act, the rules referred to in that paragraph).

第八十二条行政庁は、審査請求若しくは再調査の請求又は他の法令に基づく不服申立て（以下この条において「不服申立て」と総称する。）をすることができる処分をする場合には、処分の相手方に対し、当該処分につき不服申立てをすることができる旨並びに不服申立てをすべき行政庁及び不服申立てをすることができる期間を書面で教示しなければならない。ただし、当該処分を口頭でする場合は、この限りでない。

Article 82(1)When an administrative agency renders a disposition for which a request for review or a request for re-investigation, or an appeal based on other laws and regulations (collectively referred to as "appeals" below in this Article) may be filed, the administrative agency must inform the party subject to the disposition in writing that an appeal may be filed for the disposition, and the administrative agency with which an appeal should be filed and the period of time during which an appeal may be filed; provided, however, that this does not apply if the disposition is to be rendered orally.

２行政庁は、利害関係人から、当該処分が不服申立てをすることができる処分であるかどうか並びに当該処分が不服申立てをすることができるものである場合における不服申立てをすべき行政庁及び不服申立てをすることができる期間につき教示を求められたときは、当該事項を教示しなければならない。

(2)When an interested person has sought an instruction on whether an appeal may be filed for the disposition, and on the administrative agency with which an appeal should be filed and the period of time during which an appeal may be filed if an appeal may be filed for the disposition, an administrative agency must inform the interested person of the matters.

３前項の場合において、教示を求めた者が書面による教示を求めたときは、当該教示は、書面でしなければならない。

(3)In the case referred to in the preceding paragraph, when a person has sought the instruction in writing, the administrative agency must inform the person of the matters in writing.

第八十三条行政庁が前条の規定による教示をしなかった場合には、当該処分について不服がある者は、当該処分庁に不服申立書を提出することができる。

Article 83(1)When an administrative agency has failed to give an instruction under the provisions of the preceding Article, a person who is dissatisfied with the disposition may submit a written complaint to the administrative agency.

２第十九条（第五項第一号及び第二号を除く。）の規定は、前項の不服申立書について準用する。

(2)The provisions of Article 19 (excluding paragraph (5), items (i) and (ii)) apply mutatis mutandis to a written complaint referred to in the preceding paragraph.

３第一項の規定により不服申立書の提出があった場合において、当該処分が処分庁以外の行政庁に対し審査請求をすることができる処分であるときは、処分庁は、速やかに、当該不服申立書を当該行政庁に送付しなければならない。当該処分が他の法令に基づき、処分庁以外の行政庁に不服申立てをすることができる処分であるときも、同様とする。

(3)When a written complaint has been submitted pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (1) and the disposition is a disposition for which a request for review may be filed with an administrative agency other than the administrative agency reaching the disposition, the administrative agency reaching the disposition must promptly send the written complaint to that administrative agency. The same applies when the disposition is a disposition for which a request for review may be filed with an administrative agency other than the administrative agency reaching the disposition based on other laws and regulations.

４前項の規定により不服申立書が送付されたときは、初めから当該行政庁に審査請求又は当該法令に基づく不服申立てがされたものとみなす。

(4)When a written complaint has been sent pursuant to the provisions of the preceding paragraph, a request for review or the complaint based on the laws and regulations are deemed to have been filed with the administrative agencyin the first place.

５第三項の場合を除くほか、第一項の規定により不服申立書が提出されたときは、初めから当該処分庁に審査請求又は当該法令に基づく不服申立てがされたものとみなす。

(5)Except for the case referred to in paragraph (3), when a written complaint has been submitted pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (1), a request for review or the complaint based on the laws and regulations are deemed to have been filed with the administrative agencyin the first place.

第八十四条審査請求、再調査の請求若しくは再審査請求又は他の法令に基づく不服申立て（以下この条及び次条において「不服申立て」と総称する。）につき裁決、決定その他の処分（同条において「裁決等」という。）をする権限を有する行政庁は、不服申立てをしようとする者又は不服申立てをした者の求めに応じ、不服申立書の記載に関する事項その他の不服申立てに必要な情報の提供に努めなければならない。

Article 84An administrative agency vested with the authority to make an administrative determination or decision, or other dispositions (referred to as "administrative determination, etc." in the following Article) concerning a request for review, request for re-investigation or request for re-examination, or filing of administrative complaints based on other laws and regulations (collectively referred to as "administrative complaints" in this Article and the following Article) must endeavor to provide the matters to be entered in a written complaint and other necessary information for filing a complaint, at the request of a person who intends to file a complaint or has filed a complaint.

第八十五条不服申立てにつき裁決等をする権限を有する行政庁は、当該行政庁がした裁決等の内容その他当該行政庁における不服申立ての処理状況について公表するよう努めなければならない。

Article 85An administrative agency vested with the authority to make an administrative determination, etc. for an administrative complaint filed must endeavor to publicize the content of the administrative determination, etc. made by the administrative agency, and the status of processing the administrative complaints at the administrative agency.

第八十六条この法律に定めるもののほか、この法律の実施のために必要な事項は、政令で定める。

Article 86Beyond what is provided for in this Act, necessary matters for the enforcement of this Act are provided for by Cabinet Order.

第八十七条第六十九条第八項の規定に違反して秘密を漏らした者は、一年以下の拘禁刑又は五十万円以下の罰金に処する。

Article 87A person who has divulged any secret in violation of the provisions of Article 69, paragraph (8) is to be punished by imprisonment of not more than one year or a fine of not more than 500,000 yen.

第一条この法律は、公布の日から起算して二年を超えない範囲内において政令で定める日から施行する。ただし、次条の規定は、公布の日から施行する。

Article 1This Act comes into effect on the day specified by Cabinet Order within a period not exceeding two years from the date of promulgation;provided, however, that the provisions of the following Article come into effect on the date of promulgation.

第二条第六十九条第一項の規定による審査会の委員の任命に関し必要な行為は、この法律の施行の日前においても、同項の規定の例によりすることができる。

Article 2The necessary actions for the appointment of members of the Board under the provisions of Article 69, paragraph (1) may be performed even before the effective date of this Act in accordance with the provisions of that paragraph.

第三条行政庁の処分又は不作為についての不服申立てであって、この法律の施行前にされた行政庁の処分又はこの法律の施行前にされた申請に係る行政庁の不作為に係るものについては、なお従前の例による。

Article 3Prior laws continue to govern an administrative complaint filed for a disposition or inaction of an administrative agency, which is a disposition rendered before the enforcement of this Act or inaction by an administrative agency concerning an application filed before the enforcement of this Act.

第四条この法律の施行後最初に任命される審査会の委員の任期は、第六十九条第四項本文の規定にかかわらず、九人のうち、三人は二年、六人は三年とする。

Article 4(1)The term of office of the members of the Board who are appointed for the first time after the enforcement of this Act is two years for three members and three years for the remaining six members of the nine Board members, notwithstanding the provisions of the main clause of Article 69, paragraph (4).

２前項に規定する各委員の任期は、総務大臣が定める。

(2)The term of office of each Board member specified in the preceding paragraph is to be provided for by the Minister of Internal Affairs and Communications.

第五条前二条に定めるもののほか、この法律の施行に関し必要な経過措置は、政令で定める。

Article 5Beyond what is provided for in the preceding two Articles, necessary transitional measures for the enforcement of this Act are specified by Cabinet Order.

第六条政府は、この法律の施行後五年を経過した場合において、この法律の施行の状況について検討を加え、必要があると認めるときは、その結果に基づいて所要の措置を講ずるものとする。

Article 6Once five years have passed after this Act comes into effect, the government is to review the enforcement status of this Act, and take the required measures based on the results of the review if it finds this to be necessary.