Juki-Net Case
Japan Supreme Court
Case No. 403, 2007 (Ju) No. 454-Minshu Vol. 62, No. 3 (2008)
- Written by Kelly Simon, JD
Facts
In 1999, the Japanese legislature created the Basic Resident Register Network (Juki-Net) to develop a network of basic resident information registers to improve community services and create operational efficiency. Municipalities were required to collect and share data upon the request of other municipalities or governmental organs in a manner consistent with the Juki-Net legislation. The data collected in the Juki-Net included an individual’s name, date of birth, sex, address, residence certificate number, and information on any changes to the resident’s information. Previously, Japanese municipalities had used the same information to maintain resident registers. Within the Juki-Net, the data were retained only as long as necessary to support specified purposes in compliance with authorizing legislation. The Juki-Net legislation prohibited and punished the unintended use and disclosure of the personal-identification information collected by Juki-Net. Additionally, a council was established to provide institutional oversight of the network. Additionally, no concrete risk of the exposure of the data was indicated. Citizens (plaintiffs) brought suit against the Japanese government (defendant), arguing that the Juki-Net violated the citizens’ constitutional right to privacy.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
