Digital Extraordinary Administrative Advisory Committee Working Group (21st meeting)

Overview

Date and time: Wednesday, May 17, 2023 (2023), from 13:00 to 15:00
Location: Online
Agenda:
1. Opening
2. Proceedings
  1. About Base Registries and Institutional Issue
  2. Status of cross-sectional surveys and inspections for digital completion of administrative procedures
  3. Status of Consideration on digitalization, etc. of Legal Affairs
  4. The 7th Digital Extraordinary Administrative Advisory Committee
  5. Exchange of opinions
3. Adjournment

Materials

Minutes, etc.

Date

Wednesday, May 17, 2023 (2023), from 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.

Location

Held online

Attendees

Chairman

OGUSHI Masaki (Senior Vice Minister of Digital)

Members

Tatsuhiko Inadani (Professor, Graduate School of Law, Kyoto University)
IWAMURA Arihiro (Managing Director, Japan Business Federation)
Takafumi Ochiai (Attorney at law, Atsumi & Sakai, Foreign Law Joint Enterprise)
Masakazu Masushima (Attorney-at-Law, Mori Hamada & Matsumoto)

Minutes

Secretariat (Matsuda): I would like to conclude my remarks on the time, we will open the 21st Working Group on Digital Ad Hoc Consultations.

With regard to the attendance status of the members today, I have heard that Mr. Annen, Mr. Uenoyama, and Mr. Sugawara will be absent, Mr. Masushima will attend the meeting in the middle of the meeting, and Mr. Iwamura and Mr. Ochiai will leave the meeting in the middle of the meeting.

First of all, I would like to start today's agenda. I have been asked to proceed with the agenda at the Secretariat because Mr. Annen, Vice Chairman, is unable to attend today in a hurry. Thank you.

Today's agenda is scheduled to include four items: "Base Registry and Institutional Issue," "Status of Cross-Sectional Surveys and Inspections for digital completion of Administrative Procedures," "Status of Discussions on digitalization of Legal Affairs," and "Seventh Digital Extraordinary Administrative Advisory Committee." We would like to discuss the first agenda of the day, "Base Registry and Institutional Issue," in two parts.

For the first part, I would like you to discuss future policies concerning the provision of registration information. For this part, the Ministry of Justice is also participating.

Regarding the second part, I would like you to discuss the institutional design related to information linkages. This part is also participated by the Personal Information Protection Commission Secretariat.
First of all, Counselor Mishima will explain the first part.

Councilor Mishima: Thank you, , we will explain our future policies concerning the provision of registration information.

First, regarding the slides for "Today's Report," I believe that the following policies were agreed upon with the Ministry of Justice at the Working Group meeting on March 28. In other words, in principle, Digital Agency will be responsible for the cooperation platform, and the Ministry of Justice, which has touch points with registration applicants, will be responsible for data-quality assurance, and in the transitional period, Digital Agency will be responsible for data-quality assurance. This time, I would like to present the concept of the roadmap based on this policy.

The next page is an overview of the previous discussion, so I will omit it. Page 4 has been updated from the materials of the 19th Working Group. The cooperation infrastructure will be developed by Digital Agency as a common infrastructure in consideration of data scalability, and the Ministry of Justice will be responsible for ensuring data quality.
In response to this, page 5 is about the development of the base registry derived from registration. Regarding the registration information system operated by the Ministry of Justice, the next system is already at the development stage, so I think it is realistic to apply rules such as standards to ensure data quality at the timing of the next system renewal.

In addition, we believe that it is appropriate to consider standards related to "addresses" and "characters" in the public authorities of the country, etc., as well as input rules at the time of registration, while fully paying attention to consistency with the registration system.

On page 6, although there is still a period until 2030, as for the response to this transitional period, we would like to start providing the service after normalizing the address and degenerating the characters as soon as the institutional response and system preparation are completed in Digital Agency. In addition, as soon as the Digital Agency preparation is completed, we expect to sequentially transition the existing delivery routes and unify them.

What I have explained so far is reduced to a roadmap on page 7. The overall schedule is to aim for completion in 2030, and in the transitional period, we will start providing the service promptly after taking steps such as degeneration to ensure data quality in Digital Agency, and as soon as the preparation is completed, the existing delivery route will gradually come into transition. In addition, we have formulated a roadmap to organize standards related to addresses and characters until the renewal of the second registration information system.
That's all for my explanation.

Secretariat (Matsuda): I would like to conclude my remarks on the You mentioned that the continuation of the previous meeting has been specifically included in the schedule. Please tell us if any members have any opinions or questions about the current explanation.

Councilor Mishima: Thank you, ?

Based on the previous comments by the members, we have prepared a reference material that summarizes the policy effects of realizing the base registry for corporations as well. We have described the target procedures and policy effects here, but since we expect a policy effect of about 21.3 billion yen in total for the omission of attachments and the omission of procedures, we have also included the policy effects that we received as homework, so please refer to them again.

Secretariat (Matsuda): I would like to conclude my remarks on the Then, how about starting with the members of Ochiai?

Ochiai Member: Thank you for your explanation.

I believe that discussions are gradually accumulating each time, so in that sense, I think that there are some parts that are quite difficult, especially in real estate, but I am very grateful that you are making steady progress.

On the real estate side, as we sort out this roadmap, I think it will lead to the omission of attachments, the automation of various operations, and the omission of procedures. Mainly in the part related to real estate registry, we have asked you to create a roadmap with real estate in mind, and from the perspective of connecting with other data and leading to the omission of attachments in general, would it be okay to proceed with another arrangement?

Secretariat (Matsuda): I would like to conclude my remarks on the , Counselor, what do you think?

Councilor Mishima: Thank you, The concept of the road map presented this time is actually a road map that combines corporate and real estate, so I would like you to consider that it includes both.

Ochiai Member: I understand. Thank you very much.
On the real estate side, in particular, we have talked again about the business of various business operators such as registered real estate agent companies, and I thought that in the further efficiency of this area, there will be cooperation with databases other than real estate registry. Is it correct to understand that you will find another situation where we can cooperate and consider it separately?

Councilor Mishima: Thank you, Thank you for your question.

First of all, we are organizing the utilization of real estate registry information within the administration, and we will develop the address-based registry on the premise that it will be made public, but first of all, we are organizing it as a roadmap for utilizing it in administrative operation in terms of administrative procedures. The government as a whole has various discussions on geospatial information, and we would like to discuss how it can be utilized by industries related to private sector, based on coordination with related ministries and agencies.

Ochiai Member: I understand.

In any case, I believe that there will be other issues to be discussed in order to finally complete the form, so I would like to ask you to accumulate various points. I look forward to your continued support.

Secretariat (Matsuda): I would like to conclude my remarks on the Thank you.

Is there anything else? Is that all right?

In that case, we have been working on this matter while receiving various opinions, including last time and this time, so if there is anything after the fact, I would like to ask you to send it to the secretariat.

Then, I would like to ask your opinion to MOJ, which is participating today. In particular, Digital Agency has indicated the timing of the system renewal, responses during the transitional period, and a roadmap. If there are any concerns or points to be noted by MOJ, including those, I would like to ask for your answers. Thank you.

MOJ (Director of the Dote Division): I am Dote, Director of the Commercial Affairs Division of the Civil Affairs Bureau of the Ministry of Justice. Nice

MOJ recognizes that it is important to aim to reduce the burden on related public authorities by utilizing the Base Registry, and we will provide necessary cooperation.

In addition, as I stated in the previous Sub-Committee meeting, I recognize that the issue of real estate registry, which is to consider commercial registration and Issue as a whole, has been resolved. In addition, as you have mentioned in the materials this time, I believe that there will be Issue to be mentioned in the future. As I have stated before, the Ministry of Justice believes that this point is important, so I would like to say again.

First, in addition to the existing various electronic information linkages, it is essential to integrate and consolidate the provision and cooperation of registration information through the base registry, including the case where local governments, etc. obtains paper certificates by public use request.

The second point is that it is necessary to fully coordinate with the relevant public authorities on the premise that there are some that can be handled under the registration system and some that cannot.

Third, it is necessary to give consideration to the budget for system development and operation in Digital Agency, based on the fact that the system has been implemented at the cost of the public offices, which are the beneficiaries of the system.

I believe that it is necessary for Digital Agency to take the initiative in resolving the aforementioned issues in Issue. I would appreciate your cooperation.
That's all.

Secretariat (Matsuda): I would like to conclude my remarks on the Thank you.
With regard to the Ministry of Justice, do you have any comments from Councilor Mishima?

Councilor Mishima: Thank you, Thank you.

First of all, I believe that you are right about the point that it should be unified and consolidated through the first base registry. However, I am aware that information is provided in various forms for official requests, so I would like to organize it from now on.

In addition, we would like to fully coordinate the necessary responses to reduce the burden on the Legal Affairs Bureau, which is the provider, by responding via the base registry.
The second point is that we recognize that the entry rules for registration in particular apply, and we would like to make adjustments in the future in consideration of the current status of the registration system, as we have stated in the materials to what extent the rules can be applied at the time of entry so that it is easy to use and data maintenance in the later process.

As for the third, we would like to make necessary adjustments in the future. Thank you very much.

Secretariat (Matsuda): I would like to conclude my remarks on the . I believe that the communication we just had will take shape again.
So, that's all for the first part. I would like to ask all of you from the Ministry of Justice to leave here. Thank you very much for your time today.

Secretariat (Matsuda): I would like to conclude my remarks on the Next, I would like to talk about the second part, "information linkages Systems design."

[The "Regulated information linkages Pertaining to design" is not disclosed.]

Secretariat (Matsuda): I would like to conclude my remarks on the Now, that's all for the proceedings of the Base Registry.

Next, I would like to ask Mr. Kusunome to explain the status of cross-sectional surveys and inspections toward digital completion of administrative procedures.

Secretariat (Kusunome): Thank you, Nice to meet you. I am Kusume of the Digital Ad Hoc Secretariat.

I would like to report on the status of the cross-sectional survey towards the digital completion of administrative procedures.

On page 1, in this cross-sectional survey, we conducted a survey and inspection of the online status and future policy, etc. of more than 10,000 applications, etc. and corresponding disposition notices, etc. per year, which are shown in blue letters in the frame.

The results are shown in the graph below. First of all, regarding the status of online applications and notifications, the situation we have reported so far is the pillar on the far left, and the latest situation confirmed in this survey is the pillar in the middle. As of March this year, about 60% of the procedures correspond to digitalization.

Furthermore, the pillars in the rightmost column show our future policies up to twenty twenty-five. Except for those that are not suitable for going online, we have a policy that virtually all procedures will be compatible with going online.

In addition, as shown in 2 points in the above box, it is planned that about 80% of online payments will be handled by the twenty twenty-five.

Regarding the status of the notice of disposition for the application on page 2, it is the orange graph on the left side of this document. Recently, about 20% of the procedures are applicable to digitalization, and about 60% are applicable to twenty twenty-five.

In addition, the status of the acceptance notice for the notification is shown in the blue graph on the right. Recently, about 70% of procedures have been handled, and about 90% of procedures have been handled for twenty twenty-five.

This time, the parts with arrows on both sides above the light orange and light blue in the twenty twenty-five column are the parts that were answered that it was difficult to go online, and this point is summarized on the next page. This document shows the reasons for the procedures that were answered that it was difficult to go online. First, regarding the application and notification in 1, it is mentioned that strict identification is required in law and that it is difficult for applicants to use equipment. On the other hand, regarding the notification of disposition, there are the same reasons as the application, but there are various reasons such as those that involve the Issue of tangible objects such as qualification cards as in (3), those that require the Issue of authenticity by the Issue of identification documents as in (4), and those that are due to the response and cost effectiveness of the local government and business operators as in (5).
With regard to the reasons mentioned in (4) and (5) in particular, I believe there are a considerable number of reasons that can be dealt with, so we will request each ministry to reconsider the matter while sorting out and analyzing the Issue.

With regard to the future response on the next page, we would like to adjust a specific schedule by the end of this year for the digital completion of administrative procedures that will be online by the time of twenty twenty-five. In addition, regarding the procedures that were answered that it is difficult to be online this time, we would like to organize and analyze the Issue and request each ministry to reconsider.

Next, with regard to the procedures to be performed by a local local government, in the course of the survey and inspection this time, there were a certain number of cases in which it was difficult to understand the digitalization or the actual situation due to the fact that they are self-governing affairs. We will continue to respond with technical advice, etc., but if it is difficult to respond only with technical advice, we will consider necessary responses going forward. In particular, with regard to the procedures from the people, which are difficult to understand due to the demands of the business community, we will once again consider the current situation and the policy of online implementation.

Lastly, in terms of responses to other regions, we would like to consider responses to local rules, such as the specifications of a Issue's own method, and mechanisms to encourage autonomous efforts by each local government.
That's all for the explanation. Regarding the digital completion of administrative procedures, we would like to advance more specific efforts, such as adjusting the schedule toward the end of the year. We would appreciate if you could give us your opinions on the direction of the response. Thank you.

Secretariat (Matsuda): I would like to conclude my remarks on the Now, I would like to ask for your opinions and questions about the explanation you just gave.
Mr. Masashima, please.

Member Thank you.

Thank you for the extremely difficult survey. I think it was quite difficult, but I felt that there were quite a few people who thought that they could not do this due to a fixed idea in a sense. In particular, I felt that it was true that the procedures for inmates in correctional institutions could not be done, and it may be difficult to apply one by one, but we are doing digitalization for the weak, and if people in correctional institutions do not become able to do the digital procedures properly, they will not be able to spend their social lives after leaving the institution, so I feel that it is essentially important for the government, which aims to "leave no one behind," that these people must actually be able to do the digital procedures. I also felt that there were some people around the correctional institutions who still did not have a good perspective on this.

I believe that there will continue to be work to steadily accumulate numbers, and I understand that this is an extremely difficult process, but I believe that how many numbers can be raised is an extremely important task, so I would like to ask for your continued support.
That's all. Thank you.

Secretariat (Matsuda): I would like to conclude my remarks on the Thank you.

Mr. Iwamura, please.

Member of Iwamura: Thank you very much for Thank you very much for showing such a high figure as a result of your energetic efforts so far.

In terms of the definition of procedures for online procedures by the time of twenty twenty-five, I would like to know whether the definition includes situations in which there are no problems in law or situations in which administrative systems and interfaces have been developed and procedures can be performed online from the beginning to the end from the user's perspective.

In addition, in relation to the first question, I would like to ask how the number of administrative procedures that are digital completion in the entire flow will change. For example, even if 80 to 90% of individual applications, notifications, receptions, and notification of disposition have been made online, I do not think it will be digital completion if one flow is in a state of being eaten up by the fact that it has not been made online. The second question is how to consider this.

The third point is that specific examples of procedures that are not suitable for going online are shown on page 3. Are the procedures that will not be online to some extent explicitly indicated by the administration in the first place, including cases where the number of procedures is less than 10,000? It would be helpful if it were clear that private sector would no longer be conducting such procedures, but could it be clearly indicated?

Lastly, I understand that local rules are also being worked on within the framework of regulatory reform. In addition, how will you respond to procedures in which the number of application documents does not decrease and procedures in which the police, local government, and other contact points are not unified? For example, if information linkages by My Number or gBizID is advanced, the attached documents should be omitted, but I would like to ask how you will proceed toward such a one stop digital reform that can be accepted only once.

I will leave the room today for personal reasons, so you can reply to me later in a businesslike manner, but I would appreciate it if you could let me know. That's all.

Secretariat (Matsuda): I would like to conclude my remarks on the Thank you.

If there is anything I can answer at this point, I would like to ask you, Mr. Kusunome.

Secretariat (Kusunome): Thank you, Thank you.

First of all, Mr. Masashima's opinion is that it may be difficult to have a smartphone in a correctional institution, but I would like to ask if there is anything that can be done without stopping there. When consulting with the Ministry of Justice, I would like to proceed based on the points you pointed out.

In response to the question from Dr. Iwamura, our approach this time is to remove obstacles such as law, and after digitalization becomes possible, we will actually proceed with digitalization by developing a system or making it known that there is a simple method of accepting emails.

However, with regard to local government's self-governing affairs, for example, there is another step of preparing a system and having people participate in it, or showing digitalization's specific methods and having people use it, and there is also a step of further expanding it, but at least the national government is counting the policies of digitalization no later than twenty twenty-five, including the development of the system and the dissemination of digitalization's methods.

It is exactly as you said that it is not good if the procedures are performed in a moth-eaten manner. This time, we are requesting each ministry to online the procedures end-to-end, such as the application and the notification of disposition based on it, as well as the notification and the acceptance notification. However, I believe that there may be more detailed procedures and branched procedures. Regarding the digitalization of the entire project, we are promoting the digitalization of more than 100,000 procedures, including more detailed procedures. Based on the results, we will consider how to handle the digitalization of more than 10,000 procedures, which will considerably increase the number of procedures.

In addition, with regard to the fact that digitalization is not suitable in the first place, we have been responding by requesting each ministry and agency to show the reasons why digitalization is difficult and announcing them to a certain extent, and some of them have already been announced as (1) and (2) in Part 1 on page 3. With regard to the notification of disposition this time, as indicated by the white arrow in the rightmost column on the previous page, I believe that it will be clear towards the end of the year what can be actually done and what is difficult and impossible, and among them, we are currently thinking of responding by showing the reasons for what cannot be done.

In addition, with regard to local rules and other matters, we are currently working on a separate framework in regulatory reform to sort out our views, so we would like to continue to consider our response while monitoring such considerations.

If there is anything else, I would like to give you an administrative answer later. Thank you.

Member of Iwamura: Thank you very much for .

Secretariat (Matsuda): I would like to conclude my remarks on the Thank you.

Would you like anything else?
Mr. Ochiai, please.

Ochiai Member: Thank you very much. I would like to express my gratitude to you for organizing such a difficult investigation.

There are several points, but one is that in the end, the cost effectiveness does not match, or the number of uses is small, so the response to procedures with low cost effectiveness must be limited to some extent. I think there are probably cases where there is a certain amount of room for consideration as to whether or not everything should be done completely.

However, for example, regarding the replacement of e-mail, if there are some matters that can be reasonably eased, which can only be done in person or in writing to some extent, even if it does not lead to one of-a-kind or data use, I would like you to proceed with partial measures.

Second, matters that require identity verification have been a problem in various digitalization. Even now, for example, there are some parts that are being discussed in the sale of pharmaceutical products. Passport issues were discussed at the regulatory reform Promotion Conference, and I think they are important discussions. I think the framework for administrative procedures is also being discussed based on the update of the NIST framework, but I would like you to organize the scope of identity verification that can be reasonably done, and sort out what can be done and what cannot be done.

Finally, in your third question, regarding the digitization of documents and seals, I believe that there were about 100 types of procedures that were partially left out when the regulatory reform Promotion Conference was held in the past. I would like to ask whether it is correct to understand that the procedures that were left as they were after being left out in 2020 or so have not been improved much since then.
That's all.

Secretariat (Matsuda): I would like to conclude my remarks on the Thank you.
Mr. Kusunome, is there anything you would like to know?

Secretariat (Kusunome): Thank you, Thank you.

In regard to your question, I believe that the regulatory reform Promotion Conference is following up on the issue every year, but I believe that progress is basically being made little by little. I believe this is an indication that the issue has been narrowed down considerably at the outset.

Ochiai Member: That's right. Thank you.
I believe that the points of the seal were discussed a little while ago, and there are parts that were not sufficiently taken. I believe that there will be discussions at the regulatory reform Promotion Conference on the basis of individual projects. There is also a way to proceed with the arrangement, but I think that there are still relatively large things such as important rights transfers, so I would like to have an opportunity to work on them as well.

That's all.

Secretariat (Matsuda): I would like to conclude my remarks on the .
Now that you have time, I would like to conclude my presentation.

Next, I would like to ask Mr. Nakano, Director of the Policy Planning Department, to explain the status of consideration of digitalization and other legal affairs.

Secretariat (Nakano): I am Nakano of Digital Rincho.

The Legal Affairs digitalization is in charge of the e-LAWS and e-Gov law Search systems in Digital Agency, and the Legal Affairs digitalization Review Team is discussing the direction of the review. The purpose of the legal affairs system is on page 5, and the main requirements are discussed as shown in the slides on page 6.
Next, on page 7, based on the discussions by the Study Team so far, we will conduct a study and development for the demonstration projects of the new legal affairs system.

First of all, regarding (1), we will conduct a survey on the current status and needs of legal affairs and law and other data.

Regarding 2), we will actually make a development for a prototype of the legal affairs system and conduct a user testing.

(iii) As a longer-term perspective, we have created a Digital Legislation Roadmap on the future of digital legislation, and as you can see on page 9, we would like to conduct research on this.

Next, on page 8, in the digitalization of legal affairs, a validation on AI using a large-scale language model is also scheduled. On the other hand, regarding AI using LLM, I would like to introduce it because it is known that there are some points to be noted while it is convenient. On the right, the first point is that since it is a language model, calculation and logical inference are not certain by itself, and retrieval is not performed. While it is expected to be effective for linguistic tasks such as summarization, I believe that a law database API, which is the basis for tasks such as law and text retrieval and analysis, is required. In addition, I believe that processing combining APIs may be effective.
Second, whether the output results are true or appropriate is another matter, so when using the output, we believe that the user will need sufficient knowledge and technology to analyze and judge the accuracy and validity of the content.

Regarding my third point, I believe that it is necessary to be more careful not to be confused by falsehood, and in particular, in the task of legal affairs, strictness in complex situations is particularly required, so it is considered that a mechanism for appropriately calling attention is necessary. In addition, in order to strictly apply the rules, it is possible that it is effective to use not only a language model but also another deterministic check function in combination.

As the fourth and final point, I believe that it is necessary to ensure accountability for the drafting and execution of provisions, for example, when AI drafts such provisions.

My question is on page 10. As a draft of future policies related to the Legal Affairs digitalization, I would like to steadily conduct surveys and demonstrations on the development and utilization of the Legal Affairs digitalization and law Database.

Second, based on the Digital Legal Roadmap, I have heard that there is demand for law and other historical data and notification data, so we would like to consider expanding the target data and expanding the functions of the API.

The third and final point is that in these discussions, we will also consider validation's support for legal affairs using AI and other technologies.

Next, I would like to explain about review of digital legislation on page 12. In December last year, regarding the bill to be submitted to the extraordinary Diet, the results of the inspection were announced along with the timing of the development of notifications and circulars clarifying that digital technology can be used in regulations on paper and in-person processes, which could be related to provision. Based on the inspection of the bill to be submitted to the extraordinary Diet, review of digital legislation is being implemented for the bill to be submitted to the ordinary Diet with expanded content. This is the background up to now.

Page 13 is about the future of review of digital legislation. We submitted the The Act to Advance Reforms of Digital Regulations Plan to the National Assembly in March this year. It includes an amendment to take measures for the provisions related to the Digital Legislation Bureau process, so after the enactment of this bill, we would like to make review of digital legislation efforts continuously and autonomously. In other words, we would like each ministry to conduct inspections so that regulations on paper and in-person processes will not be newly stipulated when planning a new law, etc., and submit the results of the inspections to Digital Agency. We would like to see Digital Agency develop the necessary systems and implement review of digital legislation.

I would like to explain about the efforts of official gazettes to digitize on page 15.

There are two specific reforms, and these are reforms in response to requests from the business community. On page 16, as Reform 1, we have already implemented a Cabinet approval on the use of the Internet version of official gazettes in administrative procedures, and it is no longer necessary to submit paper official gazettes in administrative procedures.

Page 17 is Reform (2). In order to position the electronic official gazettes as the original of the official gazettes, the Cabinet Office and other ministries have started considering a new law concerning the issuance of the official gazettes.

With regard to the future of the digitization of official gazettes on page 19, as stated in the first part, based on the road map, we will complete the examination and discussion points by the middle of this year on the mechanism to digitize official gazettes, which has been issued in paper form mainly by the Cabinet Office, and submit a bill to the Diet as soon as possible.

Next, I would like to point out that these points should be kept in mind when considering the bill. We should keep in mind that paper official gazettes will be abolished in the future. We should not simply replace the current paper official gazettes with an electronic official gazettes, but we should build a technology-neutral mechanism that can respond to future technological innovation. We should also provide machine-readable electronic official gazettes so that researchers and related companies can use the official gazettes. We should also build a mechanism that can store electronic official gazettes for a long time, and provide authentic information that has not been tampered with. Finally, we would like to proceed with BPR of affairs related to official gazettes in cooperation with e-LAWS as I explained at the beginning.

Although it was a rush, that is all I have explained.

Secretariat (Matsuda): I would like to conclude my remarks on the Thank you.

Then, I believe that there are some parts that have already been discussed several times, but if there are any opinions or questions from the members, I would appreciate it.

Member : Can I just say a few words? Thank you very much. I understand that this is what the Legal Affairs digitalization Review Team is considering, and I am also an observer, but I saw that very productive and good discussions were being held.

In fact, in particular, I think it is very important to make the discussion on the way of implementation in official gazettes into an issue, and to put in functions properly, not just digitalization. I am in full agreement with the direction of doing that firmly. Thank you very much for your vigorous discussion.

That's all.

Secretariat (Matsuda): I would like to conclude my remarks on the Thank you very much. I think you are doing a good job. Thank you very much.

Now, I would like to move on to the next agenda item. I would like to briefly explain the status of preparations for the 7th Digital Launch.

[The "7th Digital Extraordinary Administrative Advisory Committee" will be closed to the public.]

Secretariat (Matsuda): I would like to conclude my remarks on the agenda. Thank you very much.

Finally, I would like to have a word from Parliamentary Senior Vice-Minister Okushi.

Senior Vice-Minister for Digital Okushi: Thank you very much for your active comments today.

First, regarding the agenda of the Base Registry and Institutional Issue, I presented a future roadmap for the provision of registration information based on our policies on the division of roles in data quality assurance. We will continue to examine institutional design and systems in cooperation with the Ministry of Justice.

Next, we have received various discussions and opinions on the system information linkages related to the design of the base registry and the provision for unintended purposes based on the law. We will continue to proceed with the arrangement with the cooperation of Personal Information Protection Commission and others.

Next is the status of cross-sectional surveys and inspections for the digital completion of administrative procedures. Based on today's discussion, we will organize and analyze the Issue based on the results of this survey, and proceed with the adjustment of the schedule toward the realization of online access up to the level of twenty twenty-five.

Third, regarding the digitalization of legal affairs, we have entered the stage of conducting surveys and demonstrations, and discussions on the digitization of the official gazettes, which will be the foundation of DX in the legal field, are in the final stage. In addition, it is necessary to continuously implement the review of digital legislation, which is being implemented on a trial basis, between the Cabinet Office and each Ministry and the Digital Agency. We will steadily implement these efforts, so we would like to ask for your continued advice.

Finally, I explained the main matters to be reported at the 7th Digital Extraordinary Administrative Advisory Committee meeting scheduled to be held in the near future. Based on today's discussion, we would like to discuss future efforts at the main body meeting. We would appreciate your continued advice and support.

Thank you very much for your time today. We look forward to working with you in the future.

Secretariat (Matsuda): I would like to conclude my remarks on the .

Finally, I would like to explain about the next Working Group meeting. The details of the next Working Group meeting will be communicated by the Secretariat later.

Regarding today's proceedings, if you do not have any objections to part of Agenda 1 "Base Registry and Institutional Issue," part of Agenda 2 "Status of Cross-Sectional Surveys and Inspections for digital completion of Administrative Procedures," and the materials of Agenda 4 "The 7th Digital Extraordinary Administrative Advisory Committee," we will keep them closed to the public. For the other parts, we will prepare the minutes later and make them public after everyone checks them.

In addition, with regard to the handling of today's materials, except for the materials I just mentioned, we would like to disclose them on the Digital Rincho website. Is that okay?
Thank you.
With that said, I would like to close the 21st meeting. Thank you very much for joining us today.