Digital Related System Reform Study Meeting (5th)

Overview

Date and Time: May 27, 2024 (Mon) from 14:00 to 15:00
Location: Online
Agenda:
1. Opening
2. Proceedings
  1. Base Registry and Institutional Issue
  2. Official gazettes Denka
  3. Efforts to promote the use of digitalization, law, etc. in legal affairs, and future policies of review of digital legislation (draft)
3. Adjournment

Materials

Minutes

Secretariat (Dai): Now that everyone is here, we will begin the 5th Digital System Reform Review Meeting.

Again, members are invited to participate online.

I understand that Mr. Iwamura and Mr. Uenoyama are absent today.

Then, I would like you to discuss today's agenda. I would like to ask the chairman to proceed with the proceedings from now on. Thank you, Mr. Ahn.

Chairman: .

Let's get into the discussion.

Today's agenda consists of the following three items: (1) Base Registry and Institutional Issue, (2) Digitization of official gazettes, and (3) Efforts to Promote Utilization of Legal Affairs in digitalization, law, etc., and review of digital legislation's Future Policies (Draft).

First of all, I would like to ask Mr. Keiho Ura, Counselor, to explain "Base Registry and Institutional Issue."

Secretariat (): Thank you for your . Nice to meet you.

As for the base registry, we have been discussing it for a long time. Thanks to you, we have submitted a bill to revise the law, and although there were deliberations until last week, we are going to proceed to the final committee and plenary session of the House of Councilors this week. In relation to this, we would like you to understand that the content of today's explanation may be slightly changed depending on the process of the bill deliberation. In addition, we would like to ask for your understanding that we will disclose the materials while monitoring the status of the bill deliberation.

Now, I would like to start explaining today's content.

First of all, there are two main points that I would like to ask you to discuss today. We have organized the roles of public authorities in the development of the base registry. In addition, I would like to ask you to discuss what kind of special provisions will be stipulated in the lower law for the special provisions for not submitting a notification of change, which is included in the bill.

Regarding the first point, the roles of related public authorities, on page 4, regarding the bill, in particular, it is mentioned that ensuring data quality will be explicitly positioned in the Basic Act on the Formation of digital society, and in the Digital Procedure Act, ensuring data quality will be positioned in various development plans.

On page 5, I would like to briefly review the philosophy of data quality assurance. First, in order to maintain the quality of public service with limited human resources, improve convenience, and further simplify and efficiency administrative operations, we will realize a one of-a-kind, connected one stop service by linking the data held by public authorities and others in addition to Digital First. In that case, in order to conduct data connections, it is necessary to improve the quality of data, particularly to make it more accurate and up-to-date, and to develop standard formats for data connections. These are included in the bill.

As for page 6, the base registry, which I would like to reiterate, is a collection of data that serves as the basis for the processing of a large number of procedures under the Basic Act on the Formation of digital society, and I believe it is basic that it is referenced by various entities and automatically processed by machines. To that end, we will ensure standards for data standardization, ensure data quality, and develop databases on both wheels.

Please see page 7. How will we play our roles with related organizations and others? First of all, as the Digital Extraordinary Administrative Advisory Committee Working Group has discussed in the past, if we are to minimize the so-called data cleansing as much as possible, it has been argued that it is important to ensure quality upstream in data distribution. To be specific, if that is the case, it is important that the agency responsible for the system, which has the authority to manage the target data, which is the most upstream, first ensure data quality. However, during the transitional period for database development, I believe that Digital Agency will help or give a little help. After that, when it comes to the development of an information exchange system for data connections, this is where Digital Agency will come in. In particular, it is very important to ensure interoperability between databases and to develop standards for data standardization, and I believe that Digital Agency will develop information provision networks and know-how for managing shared systems by national public authorities by developing APIs and the like.

On page 8, I would like to ask about the image of Issue and response policies in data quality. Broadly speaking, I believe there are formal Issue and content. In terms of format, there are various character standards. In addition, address and location are marked by notation variability. For these, we will establish standards for data standardization, or ensure thorough reference to the base registry. In particular, we will eliminate manual input as much as possible in terms of notation variability.

In addition, this same problem may be applied to the content of the data, and clerical errors may occur when manually inputting data. Therefore, the accuracy of the content should be ensured by thoroughly referring to the base registry. At the same time, when the name, location, etc. are changed in the registration system, it is of course mandatory to change the registration, but in reality, there is a sense of burden on the corporate side. In the future, we expect that the modernization of corporate registration will proceed further by reducing the feeling of burden of the procedure by creating a provision that does not require the notification of change.

In addition, in real estate registry, there are places where the determination of the parcel boundary and the cadastral survey are not always thorough, but I think that it is primarily to make efforts to improve the quality of the base registry and database by the agency with jurisdiction over the system.

For reference, for example, regarding characters, the standard of characters is listed on page 9. From the original Joyo Kanji to the so-called fourth level of JIS, JISX0213, is now within the range that can be expressed normally on information terminals, etc., but in fact, there are parts such as the Basic Resident Register and family registry that extend beyond that, and we are actually responding by performing identification work. I believe that future discussions will be held on how far the standard range should be in the base registry.

On page 10, regarding the quality of the data, in particular the notation fluctuation, we are currently working on the development of town and village character data. In the end, it is quite difficult to link them on a character basis, so in the future, we will work on adding codes and town and village character IDs and unifying the notation.

At the same time, in the actual use of the base registry, for example, by creating a mechanism in which town letters can be found by entering postal codes, I hope that in the future, when registering and entering addresses, it will be possible to achieve a unified method of writing without any variability.

It is page 11. One of the advantages of the progress of information linkages is the currency of the corporate registration. If it becomes known that it is not necessary to submit a notification of change to public authorities, etc., and it is only necessary to correct the registration, I believe that it will be corrected promptly.

Page 12 is the summary up to this point, but ensuring data quality is extremely important for smooth data connections. As for the division of roles of public authorities, first of all, we would like to have the competent agencies ensure quality in the upstream process of data, and we would like to proceed with the development and management of the system infrastructure for data connections by Digital Agency.

It is system-related. Page 18 shows the relevant amendments to the bill. It is regarded as a notification of change that has been made in the Digital Procedure Act.

Regarding this, on page 19, I listed several matters that should be specified in the lower law. The scope of the special provisions and the scope of the working days, the exemption from the application that does not automatically constitute a notification, and the notification of change only to the original applicants are notified.

First of all, the scope of the special provisions needs to be determined by the lower law. As shown on page 20, it will be a substitute for a notification of change by a corporation, so we are thinking that the lower law under each system will specify what kind of notification will be subject to the special provisions and what kind of matters will be unnecessary by referring to the specific provisions. Of course, as we carefully examine the content, not all notifications based on the law will be subject to the special provisions, so I think that the scope of the special provisions will be determined by carefully examining the applicable notifications.

The second is that holidays are specified in relation to working days. In law, you can make a information linkages every day except holidays. For example, you can register a list of corporations that public authorities has from public authorities, and if there is a change in the corporation, please let me know. In response, the Legal Affairs Bureau of the Ministry of Justice is considering a system in which if the data is updated, the content is returned accordingly, basically every day.

On the other hand, from public authorities, for example, it is rare for a corporation that was newly registered in public authorities yesterday to change its address tomorrow, so I don't think public authorities necessarily re-registers or goes to listen to it every day. We can adjust the number of working days or their frequency by specifying holidays as necessary, and public authorities and others will consider this as necessary.

The third item on page 22 is the exemption. In some cases, a notification has been made even though it is actually considered to be a notification for renewal. In addition, in some cases, special exceptions are temporarily removed in operation, such as in the case of disasters. I believe that the specific situations in which exemptions will be made will be determined by the Lower law.

Next, I would like to make a fourth point. As stated on page 23, if we do not notify the fact that a notification of change has been submitted in a sense, I think there will be cases where we will be worried about whether the notification of change has actually been approved. If we are driven by anxiety and do it, the number of procedures will not be reduced, so I would like to make a notification. However, I do not think it is necessary to make a notification like a disposition, so I would like to consider how to do this.

The following referenced articles are provided as reference, so please refer to them as appropriate.

That's all for my explanation.

Chairman: Thank you very much.

Now, I would like to begin the discussion. As you just explained, one of the Issue points that I would like you to discuss today on the second slide of the document is the roles of the relevant public authorities in the development of the base registry, and the policies and regulations of the subordinate law concerning the special provisions concerning the notification of change. Regarding 1, I asked you to summarize it earlier, and on the 12th slide, 2, there is a summary on how to divide the roles of the relevant public authorities. In short, I heard that the competent authorities of the system are upstream, and the roles of the Digital Agency are for the basic standards of standardization.

Regarding the second point, which is from page 17 on the slide, there are four issues. If this law is enacted, it has already been delegated to the Ordinance of the Competent Ministry and the Ordinance of the Ministry of Justice by the digital method, so the administrative agency does not have the option of not enacting the lower law, and I recognize that the issue is what to do with the specific content. In particular, I would like you to discuss these two points. As we discussed earlier, Mr. Iwamura and Mr. Uenoyama are absent today, so there are only three lawyers other than me. I would like you to make statements in the order of Mr. Inadani, Mr. Ochiai, and Mr. Masushima. Thank you very much.

Inadani Member: .

There are two points. One is that the role of the base registry is completely as explained. I think it is very good that it has been confirmed that it is progressing smoothly.

With regard to the policies of the second subordinate law, I think that in the scene of the exemption that is not deemed to have been made by the notification of change on page 22, the problem of what to do in the case where the company files an application for registration, which should have changed everything, but has filed an application again before changing. I don't think there is any possibility, but there is a possibility that a mistake occurs when the company manually types in, and unknown information is registered even if it could have been cleanly and uniformly registered by referring to the base registry. When such a contradiction occurs, I think it is better to give priority to the base registry. I don't think there are many such cases, but please let me confirm what you think about it.

My second question is about the method of notification. If you are thinking about digital completion in the future, I believe that there are things that can be used as a fixed destination for individuals, such as Mynaportal. What will you do in the case of companies? In particular, I believe that in the future, we must consider the operation of deeming that if a notification is made here, it is basically a notification. So, I thought that it would be a basic matter, so it would be a job to be done by Digital Agency rather than by each ministry and agency. I would like you to have some thoughts on that in the future.

Chairman: .

Then, how about the Ochiai members?

Ochiai Member: Thank you very much for your explanation.

First of all, I think it is very wonderful that the discussion on the base registry itself has progressed, because it has been a very difficult journey.

First of all, I would like to ask about the roles of the relevant public authorities. This is illustrated in a chart, but I believe it is a very important point to be able to promote cooperation in the future on page 5. I believe it overlaps with Member Inadani's second question earlier, but I believe it is important to consolidate information as much as possible in the base registry and make it official, both in terms of social efficiency and prevention of errors. At that time, in addition to the pattern mentioned by Member Inadani, for example, if local government receives information first due to some reason, I believe there is a way to think about feeding it back to the base registry. Of course, in Digital Agency, information will always come out in a place that is unrelated to the base registry, and in fact, new data can be grasped. From the perspective of quality assurance, I believe that the final goal is the figure on the right in the process of who can update it by which trigger. In order to get there, I believe that there will be quite detailed exchanges, and it is possible that the writing of information in government and ministerial ordinances will necessarily fall into the system and practice, but I believe that it is very important to improve this area. I believe that it is good for Digital Agency to make comprehensive adjustments as much as possible in the form of the unification of the system of the entire country, and in some cases, if there is an information exchange system in the sense of thorough standardization, or information that will go beyond that, or information that will be received from other parties or information that will come from other ministries and agencies, I believe that it is also good to improve the input format in that case. In that regard, I believe that the information exchange system and API of the cooperation infrastructure mentioned in No. 2 on page 7 will be cut off, and basically we will have them improved.

As for the second point, regarding the accuracy of individual data, I think there are some difficult parts, especially on the real estate side, because the description is unified and there are sudden changes. Although we are talking about ensuring the accuracy, I think that there is a possibility of bankruptcy if we try to ensure the accuracy completely, so I think that it is probably not realistic to set a certain level and make it possible to implement at least at this level, or to use it for all purposes. I think that it is inevitable to subsidize such parts for a small number of cases, but I thought that it would be difficult to work on such matters unless committee members and others who work from outside continue to say so, so I made a comment again just in case.

Finally, the part on notification, etc. is to specify the method of notification in advance, and I believe that it must be technically written in that way.

On the other hand, I think this is essentially a technical response, so if it is automatically notified when it is registered in the base registry of Digital Agency, I think there are parts that do not necessarily need to be written by law. However, it is not possible to organize it to that extent for the time being, so I think this is the way it is done.

However, if there is one more point, I think it would be more realistic to consider the correction and the effective date of the correction in the case that the latest information was not notified due to lack of accuracy or a mistake in timing.

It's been a long time, but that's all.

Chairman: . How much accuracy should we pursue? This is a matter of balance, and it is difficult.

How about you, Mr. Masashima?

Masujima Member: Thank you very much for .

I think there may be some overlap between the two, but the planning must be based on the major premise that we cannot make something that will work 100%. With the current division of roles, the high-level division of roles will be like this, but when we decide on the details, what we must do is to avoid assumptions that do not break down or make mistakes, such as nuclear power plants. We should ask them to tell us from the beginning that they will make a mistake, and then we should ask them to decide at as high a level as possible what to do if they make a mistake. By communicating in this way at the policy stage, we can proceed based on the premise of communication that we are officially safe and sound, and it will not be necessary to make an unreasonable contradiction with the premise during the course of consideration.

The second point is that we have to talk about the case where it is not regarded by "deemed." We discussed the policy of "deemed" last year, and we said that it can't be helped in the interim period. Technically, I understand that the "deemed" method has been adopted because it is smooth in relation to existing laws and regulations, or there are few parts to be corrected, but by adopting the "deemed" method, there are cases where it does not work, exceptions where it cannot be made, and so on. I saw this because I thought that a phenomenon called "spaghetti" of the system has occurred in the system. This time, you are trying to solve this problem by a fairly technical method called "holidays" and some technical methods, but the rotation of the subsystem means that it becomes complicated, which means that errors are likely to occur and it becomes difficult to understand. I thought that it is very important to say that I make a mistake and think about what to do if I make a mistake.

That's all.

Chairman: . Japanese Kasumigaseki is not good at saying "I'm making a mistake."

Masujima Member: Thank you very much for But they actually make mistakes.

Chairman: That's right. As a human being, it's natural to make mistakes, and the important thing is to decide on a procedure for what to do in the event of a mistake.

Masujima Member: Thank you very much for That's right. I told them to do their best not to make a mistake, but this work of stuffing has become a waste, or rather, it has become the usual Japanese craftsmanship to do so.

Chairman: .

What do you think, Councilor Lin Po?

Secretariat (): Thank you for your .

We will be working on the details from the current stage, so for today, we will make use of the opinions we have received in the future system design. However, I would like to make some comments. As you pointed out, I would like to keep in mind that design will be conducted on the premise that there may be errors. In order to avoid errors, we tend to conduct double checks, so while assuming that there may be some errors during efficiency, the point will be to automate the process and reduce manual input and labor as much as possible. In particular, there may be discrepancies between the registration information and the information held by each ministry, regardless of whether they are coordinated or not. Therefore, I assume that Digital Agency will basically function as a window to determine what procedures will be used to make corrections in the event of any discrepancy. I would like to advance the specifics of this.

With regard to notifications, there is a group in Digital Agency that is simplifying and reviewing systems and procedures for business operators. While discussing with them, we are talking about whether there are places where we can share and cooperate in issuing notifications and notifications. In a sense, there is one thing to avoid creating a different system in Digital Agency, but I think it would be good if we could take an approach that allows us to communicate with business operators in a unified manner as much as possible by cooperating in Digital Agency.

With regard to the accuracy of the information itself, there may be a difference in the way of approach between the cooperation of the registration information, which provides the registration information as it is, and base registry for address, which will consider linking the registration information to the residence indication in the future. At the present time, most of local government has announced that this is the correct town code, so I would like to confirm such points first and unify the town code level.

However, from there on, the world of addresses is deep, so I would like to do this based on the actual situation in local government without aiming for perfection from the beginning. In particular, regarding the display of residences, there are some places in local government that already manage their lot numbers digitally to some extent, and others that manage them manually on paper. So, I am thinking about doing a survey this fiscal year while looking at what kind of places there are that can help with the system. I would like to consider how to manage without the hassle of local government as much as possible while carefully looking at the actual situation in local government.

This is a bit of a philosophical talk at this stage, but I would like to consider the details based on your comments. Thank you very much.

Chairman: .

Now, I would like to move on to the next agenda. Agenda 2 and 3 will be followed by an explanation and then a question and answer session.

Now, with regard to Agenda 2 "official gazettes Digitalization", I would like to ask for an explanation from Mr. Tanaka, Assistant Director of the official gazettes Digitalization Study Office. Mr. Tanaka, please.

Cabinet Office (Assistant Director Tanaka): Thank you for .

As official gazettes Denshi, thank you very much for the opportunity to explain today.

First of all, regarding the computerization of official gazettes, since it was a project of the former Digital Ad Hoc Committee, I would like to briefly review the background. Regarding the background of the computerization of official gazettes, first of all, there was a request for the Digital Ad Hoc Committee in the spring of 2022, and after that, it was discussed at the Working Group of the Digital Ad Hoc Committee, and it was decided in the Comprehensive Review Plan and the Process Chart in December 2022. Here, it was decided that legislative measures were necessary to computerize official gazettes, and then, in March 2023, the Cabinet Office established the so-called Expert Council. Mr. Shishido, who was a member of the Digital Ad Hoc Committee, served as the chairman, and after the compilation there, it was enacted in the form of a law last December. In this law, at the same time as the computerization of official gazettes, matters such as the promulgation of law in official gazettes are also stipulated by law, and in that sense, I think it has become a symbolic initiative of computerization. The date of enforcement is within one year and six months from the date of promulgation, and although a specific date has not yet been decided, we are currently conducting consideration, including operational matters that will be explained later.

Next, I would like to briefly explain the main points of the law. First of all, I have roughly described four points on the third slide. First of all, regarding the issuance method of official gazettes, although this law does not provide a definition of official gazettes, official gazettes is an electromagnetic record, so-called electronic data, in which matters posted in official gazettes are recorded. When official gazettes is issued, what is naturally on the server of the Cabinet Office, which is the issuer, is the so-called original copy, but the point is that it is downloaded by the people through the website. There is a provision in this law that what is downloaded at that time is exactly official gazettes, and what this means is that it is theoretically positioned that if the information in the data is the same through electronic signatures, etc., the data held by public authorities and the data downloaded by the people are treated as the same thing. In relation to (ii), this law provides that the promulgation of law is carried out in official gazettes, so when the law is promulgated, the data posted in official gazettes is the so-called original copy, but even for the data downloaded by the people, if an electronic signature is attached and the authenticity is guaranteed, it is an original copy. Therefore, in the future, when we promote the utilization of legal data, etc., I believe that it has become theoretical support for the fact that the data is the original copy of the law.

As for other points, (iii) states that there are still some people who are unable to use the Internet, and it states such consideration measures, but in any case, the time when law was promulgated is the time when it was uploaded to the website, so theoretically, even if such consideration measures are not taken, the prerequisite that law will be provided to all the people at the time of upload will be satisfied.

In addition, the long-term disclosure of (iv) is more from the viewpoint of convenience for the people, but since official gazettes is a national public relations, it is basic to disclose the information permanently as much as possible, and since some matters that should be considered for privacy are included in official gazettes, such matters are disclosed only for a part of the disclosure period to prevent the use for other purposes.

In addition, as written in the U.S. Seal at the end of this article, official gazettes's records have not been transferred to the National Archives of Japan until now, but the Act stipulates that they will be transferred to the National Archives of Japan and stored permanently.

Finally, I would like to explain specific efforts to be made after the enforcement of the Act. The dotted line at the bottom of the fifth slide shows the policies decided by the Advisory Council. First of all, we will develop the law, and make every effort to ensure basic services. Since official gazettes is a national public relations agency, the main problem is that the promulgation of law cannot be carried out stably due to system failures and other reasons. First of all, we will make it a basic rule to submit the documents on time, at 8:30 a.m. or so. In addition, we are aware that efforts should be advanced in the future for the convenience of utilizing such data, which is currently in PDF format, and we intend to comprehensively advance such efforts in line with system renewals and other matters.

The specific content is enclosed in the green frame above, but first of all, we are thinking of introducing new technologies such as means to ensure authenticity such as electronic signatures and technologies to suppress privacy. In addition, regarding (ii), we would like to proceed with consideration in the future, particularly regarding the realization of a machine-readable data structure.

It's simple, but that's all for the explanation.

Chairman: .

Next, regarding Agenda 3 "Efforts to promote the use of digitalization, law, etc. in legal affairs, and review of digital legislation's future policies (draft)", Mr. Nakano, Director of the Office of Planning, would like to explain.

Secretariat (Nakano): Thank you very much .

We have a working group under the Digital System Reform Review Committee, and I would like to explain based on the contents discussed by the working group last Friday.

First, we implemented the "demonstration projects for Promoting the Use of digitalization, law, etc. in Legal Affairs" last year. I would like to explain the outline of the results. There are three purposes of our legal affairs system as described on page 4. We are working to secure a foundation to realize efficient review of law, etc., to strategically convert law, etc. into open data, and to adapt legal affairs to digital principles.

In the Digital Legal Framework Roadmap described here, the current situation is insufficient access to law and other data, manual work, and text management in visual inspection in Phase 0, but in the end, as a digital twin of Phase 5, we aim to create a world in which the effects of law can be simulated by automatically analyzing the text in virtual space.

In addition, regarding the outline of the survey and demonstration last year, we have conducted surveys and demonstrations on the six matters listed on pages 6 and 7. I would like to briefly introduce some points. By actually prototyping the Legal Affairs Editor and implementing user testing, we have improved the prototype while performing user testing to see if it is possible to revise the text on a penetration basis and automatically shift the article.

As for the outline of the results, for example, regarding the function to automatically generate a revised text and a new / old comparison table reflecting the content of the revision that is being planned, and the function to output a word file of the revised text and the new / old comparison table reflecting the content of the revision that is being planned, the results show that it is desirable to continue the development for implementation and the detailed technical validation from this fiscal year onwards.

On the other hand, it has been pointed out by the Working Group that the revision by the N-stage rockets, which are so-called two stage rockets and three stage rockets, and the partial revision of the Partial Revision Act are technically difficult and there is not much need for them, and above all, the development of the system should be prioritized.

In addition, regarding the current status and future policies of efforts to promote the use of digitalization, law, and other data in legal affairs, page 20 is an extract from the materials of the 4th Digital Rincho in 2022, and we have been working to establish a system to provide digital originals of law data, and to realize a workflow centered on a database.

Page 21 shows the main developments and changes in the situation since then. First of all, generative AI products using a large-scale language model (LLM) have been announced one after another. Mr. Masushima was also a judge, and at the law API Hackathon, we received a proposal that is somewhat close to Phase 5, which automatically examines whether the design of buildings conforms to the Building Standards Act. I think we can see a little bit of potential for future development. In addition, the law of the e-Gov law Search itself has been designated as the base registry, and the Act on the Issuance of official gazettes, which you explained earlier, has been passed, and it is stipulated that the Basic Registry will be issued on the website. You explained the bill on the base registry in Agenda 1, and it is also being deliberated by the Diet. official gazettes

In addition, with regard to the development and provision of the law Database Base Registry, official gazettes has been digitized for law, and the electronic version posted on the web will be the original copy of official gazettes. As for the Articles of Incorporation, the current e-Gov law Search is providing highly reliable data promptly after the promulgation. In addition, it is planned to improve the functions of the e-Gov law Search and the law API this fiscal year so that past data can be obtained, and we are currently working to link them.

This is illustrated on page 23. In the past, it was mainly the creation and disclosure of documents that were difficult to reuse and digitally use, and in visual inspection and law data maintenance, there was a lot of manual work and there was no consistency in the disclosure method. Now, we will reuse the information, and in law, it will be issued electronically, and we will aim to use it when integrating it.

In addition, with regard to the other Issue, which is the development and provision of a base registry for public notice data, the point is that it may be necessary to expand the scope of the data we will develop in the first place. This is the current situation in Issue, but there is no unified database that provides the latest and accurate data for public notices. In addition, it is said that there are public notices that have a legal nature in the consideration of the official gazettes Act, which provides for the digitization of official gazettes. On the other hand, there is no structured format such as the law Standard XML Schema for public notices. Therefore, as a future policy, we will consider the XML schema for public notices in the survey and demonstration projects in 2024. Based on the efforts for the digitization of official gazettes, we will organize the scope of development in cooperation with Digital Agency, the Ministry of Justice and Legislation, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, and related ministries and agencies, the data format to be disclosed, and other matters, and we will develop the system and aim to start providing the base registry for public notices by the end of fiscal 2026.

In addition, regarding the draft action plan on page 26, the lower notification is the content that I just mentioned. As mentioned above, we will review the workflow of legal affairs to promote the use of legal affairs digitalization and law data, improve the law editing function and law API, and development the legal affairs knowledge-sharing tool. We will conduct development and implementation in order, prioritizing them above all. We will conduct surveys and demonstrations on medium - to long-term Issue, prototype legal affairs support tools, and promote services using law data in development. These are the action plans that we have now set forth.

In addition, regarding review of digital legislation on page 30, we are currently verifying the compliance of seven items of regulations on paper and in-person processes and information related to floppy disk, which designates media, with digital principles, and since August last year, we have been newly verifying the provisions that specify administrative procedures for which information systems are expected to be developed, and we have distributed the regulations on paper and in-person processes Inspection Tool α version to national and local local government. Currently, the results of the inspection so far are that 93 bills and 142 provision were inspected by the extraordinary Diet session last year, and the inspection is currently being continued in the ordinary Diet session. regulation

With regard to the direction of this initiative, the review of the existing law of approximately 10,000 provision is scheduled to be completed in June, and the implementation of technical validation is underway. In addition, some of the bills inspected in review of digital legislation have already been implemented, and the necessary development of low-level law is underway.

In addition, the Alpha version of the regulations on paper and in-person processes Inspection Tool has received quite good evaluations from ministries and agencies, so we would like to further improve it. As for our future response policies, we would like to strengthen the functions of the review of digital legislation so that the development and operation of business design and information systems can be examined from the planning and drafting stage of the policy, and ensure the consistency of systems, businesses, and operations through reviews according to each phase, such as the budget request stage and the execution stage, of the Government Information Systems Project. Based on this package law, each ministries and agencies will continue to inspect the operation of business systems in view of the operation in conformity with digital principles from the planning stage of the law, etc., and submit it to the Digital Agency. The Digital Agency will examine the results of the review of the regulations on paper and in-person processes and the technology demonstration for that purpose a little, and based on these good practices, we are now considering further promoting the digitalization in the operation of the law, including business systems, for each ministries and agencies and local local government, and providing support for the development and deployment of the regulations on paper and in-person processes Inspection Tool, which is currently being developed in-house. development design

Although it was a rushed explanation, I would appreciate if you could give me your opinions and questions in addition to the computerization of official gazettes. Thank you very much.

Chairman: Nakano, Planning Officer.

Then, I would like to have a combined statement on agenda items 2 and 3. As before, I would like to ask Member Inadani to make a statement.

Inadani Member: Nice to meet you.

I believe that the perspective of digitalization of the legal system is extremely important for both Agenda 2 and Agenda 3, and I think it is amazing that there has been tremendous progress in both of them.

I would like to ask a few questions. First of all, with regard to official gazettes, I understand very well that there is a problem of how to consider privacy. However, for example, examples of adverse dispositions reflect the actual situation of legal interpretation and operation, so I feel that there is a problem that researchers cannot investigate, or people who are engaged in legal practice cannot investigate. I believe that you explained that it will be stored for a long time in another place, but I think that limiting the viewing period is one way, and I think that it is a useful method, but for example, you can make them swear that they will use it for a legitimate purpose, confirm their identity, and then let them use it if it is secure. At that time, if the storage and management methods are messed up, or if it is intentionally spread, it will be subject to punishment. I wonder if it is possible to think of a method that can investigate who saw the data that was spread. Or, if there is a method that can investigate who saw the data that was spread, it will be quite effective. It may be a combination of analog methods and digital methods, but I think there is one way to balance them.

The other is that we are going to advance the digitalization of legal affairs and raise the phase. In particular, when we are talking about simulating law in a virtual space, I think there will be questions about what to do with court precedents and the examples of dispositions I just mentioned. In particular, court precedents, especially court precedents in lower courts, are particularly difficult to access, as is the case with detectives. Of course, there are companies that have been publishing court precedents, so how to separate them from private sector's projects will be a problem. With that in mind, from the perspective of advancing digitalization, especially digitalization of the legal system, I think it will be necessary to consider centralized digitalization of court precedents and examples of dispositions in the future, and to use them as public information as much as possible while at least involving private business as necessary and using technologies that can take privacy into consideration. In particular, I think it will be necessary from the perspective of using them in law simulations. I think it would be good if you could discuss this in various ways in the future.
Thank you very much.

Chairman: ?

Ochiai Member: Thank you very much.

First of all, regarding official gazettes, there are parts that will really be in the form of an electronic original, so in this regard, I think there is a very epoch-making part. To put it the other way around, I think that the electronic original is more organized than the general business law. In that case, I think that the necessary measures to organize various things have been organized on the premise of that. Therefore, we have discussed the review of the practice of writing and affixing a seal. In the end, I think that there are many administrative agencies that have paper, so in addition to the point of machine readability, I would like to see the information organized here lead to further digitalization and reduction of paper.

This is official gazettes. I would like to ask another question about overall legal affairs in digitalization. I think it is wonderful that we are making great progress, but I believe there are several points to be made in the future. First of all, although there are some parts that are being discussed in the subworking on autonomous driving, I believe there is talk of advancing the Road Traffic Act to the point where it can be machine-readable and machine-enabled. I believe that the goal, which is more difficult than a simple machine readable, is becoming one step higher. I do not believe that all law will be affected immediately, but in terms of the goal at a future level, I believe it will be important to sort out how to implement such a goal.

As for the second point, I think it is most important to firmly continue the ecosystem that has been created. Many people participate in hackathons and other events, and I think this is a wonderful initiative, but in fact, it is possible that people in the world will forget about one initiative in about three years. In that case, I think that when various people come to visit us, it is also the users, and we are creating a circle of friends to receive feedback and improve ourselves, or we are creating private sector's collaborators. I think this is true for digital catalogs and other products, and I think that appropriate maintenance of these products will lead to the maintenance of one extremely important business domain, so I would like you to do your best in that regard.

That's all from me.

Chairman: . If you make it machine-readable, you can't teach it to a machine.

How about you, Mr. Masashima?

Masujima Member: Thank you very much for . I would like to ask one thing and two comments.

First of all, it is very good that official gazettes is being made technology-neutral this time, but for example, I think that the Bank of Japan notes do not say anything in particular about what the specifications are. Even so, the Bank of Japan will make it so that it will not be forged. Even if it is not written in the law, it will do so. So, is official gazettes processed this time? Or is it written somewhere that it will satisfy this and other elements called performance regulations, which may be a lower level law, and the technology is not specified separately? I would like to know where it was made.

The second point is that I think it is very good that digitalization, the legislative office this time, is working with the high goal of becoming an institutional digital twin in Phase 5. However, in order to reach the state of an institutional digital twin, I feel that it will not work well unless we have an idea of what to do in Phase 1 and how to finally reach Phase 5 in all phases. What I felt was rather important at that time was that it would be better to have a relatively high resolution of the situation called an institutional digital twin in Phase 5. I don't think we can do a very detailed simulation no matter how far we go. For example, as you said earlier, if we are going to do a digital twin based on court precedents, court precedents are issued when the court doesn't know how to read law, so I feel that it is actually quite difficult to have a digital twin that anticipates until then. Or if it is necessary to know what the regulation is like depending on the granularity of this simulation, I think that it is necessary to properly follow the situation of data maintenance in law in each phase. Therefore, if what we are doing is aiming for Phase 5, I think it would be very good if you could increase the resolution of what Phase 5 is like and decide what needs to be done in each phase so that what is necessary for it can be done.

In relation to this, I would like to close my remarks by saying that Kasumigaseki is no different than other prefectures, and it will progress more and more, but the more it progresses, the greater the gap with local governments, and the more it becomes a Narumi story, and I believe that this will lead to political instability. From the user side, whether it is national or regulation affairs, in the end, the contact point is held by the local governments, so no matter how many countries have worked hard, regulation is still old-fashioned, and the stress does not decrease at all, so I feel that we may not be able to say that regulation is not so relevant. Of course, I think that it is inevitable that there will be time lags, and I am well aware that there are various local government, but as Mr. Kobayashi often says, there are probably many stories that the local part is the same foundation after all, so I thought that it would be good if you could think about what the local government was like when you proceed with each of them, without creating a difference in response from the local government, and with a little consideration of the fact that if you create a difference in response, the user experience will not improve.

That's all.

Chairman: . You must have been thinking about the countryside until now, but I feel like we have finally reached Okunoin.

Then, Assistant Director Tanaka, regarding the official gazettes case, I believe you pointed out the issues of consideration for privacy, horizontal expansion of the idea that digital data is the original, and the definition of official gazettes itself. Please tell us if you have any comments on these issues.

Cabinet Office (Assistant Director Tanaka): Thank you for .

I think the relationship between privacy pointed out by Member Inadani is that we would like to reuse some of the privacy information for research purposes. In fact, the official gazettes Publication Law provides a certain regulation for data reuse, and to be specific, it requires the approval of the Prime Minister for business operators who create databases. As a standard for approval, we would like to make it possible for privacy information to be used for legitimate purposes.

In addition, regarding the horizontal expansion pointed out by Dr. Ochiai, I would like to work together with Digital Agency while sharing knowledge.

In addition, regarding the issue of technology neutrality that Mr. Masashima pointed out at the end, as you stated, it is stipulated by law that such measures will be taken, and the details of the specific measures will be written down in a Cabinet Office Ordinance. To be specific, it is written by law that measures will be taken to certify that the documents have been prepared by a Prime Minister, and the details of the specific measures will be written down in a Cabinet Office Ordinance. The fact that such measures will be taken, that is, to ensure the authenticity of the documents, is a matter of law, so we have organized it this time.

Chairman: Thank you very much.

So, Mr. Nakano, if you have any comments on such a point, please let me know.

Secretariat (Nakano): Thank you very much .

First of all, Mr. Inadani pointed out what we should do about precedents and adverse dispositions. Regarding precedents, I believe that the Ministry of Justice and the Supreme Court are making various efforts. For example, whether we should link them as a database is precisely because the people of private sector are importing both the law and the ruling into generative AI, and we can think of services that are linked, so I wonder how far the Government should go. As you pointed out, it is exactly as you say that law cannot be interpreted without a ruling, so I would like to consider what kind of efforts we can make.

Next, regarding the legal affairs digitalization of the Ochiai members, it is as you said that it is impossible to understand from machine readability to machine inclusion simply by reading the text itself, such as when the text itself is written in an abstract. This was also pointed out by the law API Hackathon Working Group. I believe it is quite difficult Issue, but I would like to consider what kind of method there is.

In addition, continuing this ecosystem that has been created once will lead to preventing the disparity between Masushima members and local people from widening, but our efforts are basically all open, including the report. We are planning to open the source code as much as possible, and we actually held a workshop on law × Digital on our own initiative, and I am aware that people from local government and legal tech in private sector are participating, so I would like to work on promoting development in cooperation with the public and private sectors as well as local people.

In addition, Mr. Masashima is correct in pointing out that it will be necessary to work on each stage until we reach the digital twin. At a time when we are still in Phase 0, it has not yet been possible to create a database for notifications among the rules that are said to have legal normativity. On the other hand, it has become quite clear that it will take a considerable number of man-hours and resources to actually create a base registry for this. I believe it is important to proceed with this step by step, and to proceed together with the help of the people of private sector. We would appreciate your continued guidance.

Although it is a mixed answer, I would like to make my response and comment.

Chairman: . I think we were able to have a very productive discussion.

Actually, my hobby is to read the supplementary provisions of the law that revises part of the law. If you can't mechanize completely, that hobby may remain for a while.

However, even so, whether it is the story of official gazettes or the digitalization of legal affairs, it is a work that is truly related to the grand plan of the nation for 100 years, which will completely change the tradition of more than 100 years of modern Japanese history. I think that it is a difficult work, but the people of the Secretariat are actually working to rebuild the foundation of the foundation of Japan, a country under the rule of law, and I have been listening to you very deeply, thinking that I would like you to decorate your final beauty. Thank you very much.

Finally, I would like to hear a few words from Director General Tomiyasu.

Director-General Tomiyasu: Thank you very much for your time today.

In closing, I would like to say that Chairman Ahn is very encouraging. Everyone is doing their best steadily, so thank you very much for your words of support.

We are currently submitting a bill to the Diet that includes amendments to the Base Registry, and it is being deliberated this week, but it has not yet been passed. Therefore, we have firmly requested that the bill be deliberated by the Diet first. If the bill is passed as proposed by the Government of Japan, we will work out the details of the system based on today's discussions. We apologize for any inconvenience.

In addition, regarding the computerization of official gazettes and the digitalization of legal affairs, the Cabinet Office has worked hard to bring official gazettes computerization to this point, and although there was an aspect of the efficiency of government business and the issue of machine readability, I believe that the promotion of DX of digitalization or business of the private sector Division and the final development system will contribute to that, or create a synergistic effect with it. At the Hackathon of law Data API I held last year, various ideas were put forward due to the fact that data from the construction industry, mainly the construction industry, is digitized and a synergistic effect is exerted with the API of law Data, so I believe that the business we are working on now will be more effective if it is in line with the progress of digitalization in the field of private sector.

In addition, with regard to the promotion of digital legislation, we are now in the final phase of the review process for the approximately 10,000 provision that you created a road map for two years ago. At the end of March and the end of June, there are a little less than 2,000 blocks each. We are working hard with each ministry to confirm the review, so I would like to report on this later. In addition, there was a talk about regulation, but there is a talk about expanding the confirmation of the compatibility of digital principles to local government, so we are studying various ways to smoothly review regulation, and I would like to give you various ideas, and I would like to hear the opinions of the members. I would also like to hear your opinions about this someday. regulations on paper and in-person processes

Lastly, we would like to create Priority plan in Digital Agency. I believe that it is very important to consider systems such as the promotion of digital legislation, formerly known as digitalization, in line with digital. Needless to say, when formulating new policies, it is necessary to carefully look at the consistency with existing digital and data, and the efficiency of operations. Therefore, I would like to announce that the consistency of the three trinity of policies, systems, operations, and system data will be secured, and I would like to firmly establish this within the Government. I would also like to hear your various opinions.

Thank you very much for your time today.

Chairman: Tomiyasu.

Then, the Secretariat would like to contact you regarding the holding of the next review meeting.

Secretariat (Dai): Finally, I would like to explain the schedule and handling of the minutes of the next review meeting.

The next review meeting is scheduled to be held on Tuesday, June 11.

Regarding today's agenda, we will prepare the minutes later and disclose them after everyone checks them. In addition, we will disclose the materials on the website of the Digital System Reform Review Committee while adjusting the timing based on the status of deliberation of the bills related to today's agenda.

That's all for the explanation.

Thank you for joining us today.

Chairman: With this, we conclude the 5th Digital System Reform Review Meeting. Thank you very much, everyone.