Electronic Power of Attorney Law Enforcement Review Meeting (1st)

Since five years have passed since the enforcement of the Act on Promotion of Dissemination of Electronic Power of Attorney (Act No. 64 of 2017), the Committee on the Status of Enforcement of the Electronic Power of Attorney Act will be held pursuant to the provisions of Article 4 of the Supplementary Provisions of the Act on Promotion of Dissemination of Electronic Power of Attorney in order to inspect the status of enforcement and examine future directions.

Overview

Date and time: Wednesday, August 16, 2023, from 10:00 to 12:00
Location: Online
Agenda:
1. Opening
2. How to proceed with the Review Meeting
3. The choice of the chairman
4. Proceedings
  1. Overview of the Electronic Power of Attorney Act
  2. Status of Enforcement of the Electronic Power of Attorney Act
  3. How to proceed from the next time
5. Adjournment

Event Information

The first Electronic Power of Attorney Law Enforcement Review Meeting will be held.

Materials

References

Reference 1: Chronology of the Electronic Power of Attorney Act (PDF / 810 kb)

Relevant policies

Electronic Power of Attorney Act

Minutes

Date

Wednesday, August 16, 2023, from 10:00 a.m. to 11:45 p.m.

Location

Held online

Attendees

UEHARA Tetsutaro (Professor, Faculty of Information Science and Engineering, Ritsumeikan University)
Soshi Hamaguchi (Senior Staff Member, Keio University SFC Research Institute)
Hiroshi Miyauchi (Attorney, Miyauchi & Mizumachi IT Law Office)
Rie Yamaguchi (Associate Professor, Graduate School of Information Science and Engineering, The University of
Keiko Itakura (Head of Security, Medley Corporate Design Department, Inc.)
Reiko Kasai (Manager of Open Innovation Center and Digital Solution Promotion Department, LAWSON Incubation Company, Inc.)

Minutes

Tonami Digital Agency: Now that it's on time, we will start the first meeting of the Electronic Power of Attorney Law Enforcement Status Review Committee. Thank you very much for taking time out of your busy schedule today. My name is Tonami Digital Agency, and I will serve as the secretariat. Nice to meet you.
On behalf of the Secretariat, Mr. Digital social common function Group Digital Agency and Mr. Kusunoki, Group Manager, would like to offer an address at the opening of this review meeting. Thank you very much.

Kusunoki Digital Agency: Nice to meet you, . My name is Kusunoki.
Thank you very much for gathering at this review meeting despite your busy schedule. On behalf of the Secretariat, I would like to offer my greetings for holding this review meeting. I'm sorry, but I'm on the move and it's a little noisy because I'm in the car.
With regard to this Review Meeting, since five years have passed since the enforcement of the Act on Promotion of Dissemination of Electronic Power of Attorney, which came into effect in January 2018, this Review Meeting will be held in accordance with the provisions of Article 4 of the Supplementary Provisions to review the status of enforcement and consider future directions.
As you are aware, the Electronic Power of Attorney Act is a legislative measure that contributes to the digitalization and digital-first of business by efficiency the procedures that have been realized by affixing a seal to a paper power of attorney, etc., by presenting to the counterparty to the contract the fact that the representatives, etc. of the corporation have granted the authority of representation to the employees, tax accountants, etc. to carry out the procedures on their behalf and the fact that they have the authority to carry out the procedures on their behalf, after securing the trust of the content thereof by technical and institutional means.
In addition to checking the enforcement status of the law, as a review of the Issue for the spread of electronic power of attorney and future directions, we would like to find out the possibility of further utilization of this electronic power of attorney for the promotion of the digital society after conducting a wide range of discussions on the need for digital power of attorney, which will be convenient if realized, regardless of the power of attorney issued by corporate representatives or the power of attorney issued by electronic power of attorney handling business operators.
Compared to the review five years ago, the situation has changed significantly in some areas, including the spread of My Number Card. In that sense, I believe it is important to reorganize Issue for the spread of Okinawa.
In particular, during the COVID-19 pandemic, significant progress has been made in social digitalization, including contracts. On the other hand, when it comes to delegation in particular, it is not a corporation but a person. For example, in the recent issue of misidentification of minors, for example, in Individual Number Card Point support projects, when procedures were taken on behalf of so-called elderly people, there were cases in which misidentification occurred due to people forgetting to log out. Even during the COVID-19 pandemic, I have a strong sense of how difficult it is to smoothly carry out procedures on a digital basis by an agent rather than the person himself.
I hope that the members will be able to receive your frank opinions and engage in active discussions. Thank you very much for your cooperation today.

Tonami Digital Agency: . Next, I would like to explain how to proceed with this review meeting. Please take a look at the installation guidelines in Material 1.
In addition, we have posted today's materials on the Digital Agency website, so I would like all of you who are attending the meeting to check them.
In addition, regarding the introduction of each committee member, I would like to introduce them by distributing the installation guidelines. Thank you very much.
As explained in the previous address, the Committee will inspect the status of implementation of the Act on Promotion of Dissemination of Electronic Power of Attorney, which came into effect in January 2018, and examine the future direction based on the provisions of Article 4 of the Supplementary Provisions since five years have passed since the enforcement in January 2023.
The content of this study is to inspect the status of enforcement of the Electronic Power of Attorney Act, including the status of use of electronic power of attorney by certified electronic power of attorney handling business operators, and the status of efforts to ensure the responsibilities of the national government, etc. as specified in Article 4, such as public relations activities by the national government. In addition, the content of this study is to discuss the arrangement of Issue, future directions, and future directions of responses, including how to expand the corresponding government system, and the possibility of application to general delegation and proxy actions.
In addition, if it is deemed necessary for the progress of the Review Committee, necessary persons other than the Committee members and the Secretariat may participate in the Review Committee as observers and make statements and ask questions. In addition, the materials of the Review Committee will be disclosed as a general rule. In addition, the Secretariat will prepare the minutes and minutes of the Review Committee, which summarize the comments made at the Review Committee, after confirmation by the Committee members. These minutes and minutes will also be disclosed as a general rule. However, this does not apply if the Chairman determines that it is desirable to keep the Review Committee, the materials of the Review Committee, and the minutes of the Review Committee closed to the public due to the protection of corporate information, etc., and obtains the approval of the Committee members in advance. In this case, the Committee members and observers will be obliged to maintain the confidentiality of business secrets learned through the Review Committee. In addition, the Installation Guidelines will be reviewed as necessary.
Please let us know if you have any questions or opinions on how to proceed with this review meeting.
Since there seems to be no opinion, in accordance with this outline, we would like to decide the chairman of the Review Committee by mutual election of the members. As the secretariat, we would like to recommend Mr. Tetsutaro Uehara. What do you think?

(VOICE OF NO OBJECTION)

Tonami Digital Agency: Thank you very much. Then, since you did not object, I would like to ask Mr. Uehara to chair this review meeting, and I would like to ask Chairman Uehara to proceed with the proceedings from now on. Then, Chairman Uehara, please.

Chairman Uehara: Yes, I am Uehara, who has just been recommended as chairman.
This issue, which I am also working on as a research theme, is originally a difficult issue in terms of how to incorporate the idea of delegation into so-called digital world authentication, but there is another issue that it is difficult to spread due to legal support. I hope that this issue can be resolved in the committee's discussions. Thank you for your cooperation.
Then, I would like to start with the agenda. First of all, regarding agenda 1, I would like to ask for an explanation from the secretariat.

Tonami Digital Agency: Yes, then, in Material 2, the outline of the Electronic Power of Attorney Act, the secretariat will explain according to this material.
First, I would like to explain the outline of the Electronic Power of Attorney Act. The Electronic Power of Attorney Act has been enacted for the purpose of promoting economic activities using electronic commerce and other advanced information and communication networks by establishing basic guidelines for promoting the spread of "electronic power of attorney," which indicates that the representative of a corporation has granted the authority of representation to an employee, and by establishing a system for certifying "electronic power of attorney handling services," which is to store electronic power of attorney at the request of a corporation, etc. and present it to the persons concerned, etc.
The main provisions of the Electronic Power of Attorney Act are the definition of terms such as electronic power of attorney in Article 2 of the Act, and the provision in Article 3 that the competent minister shall formulate basic guidelines to promote the spread of electronic power of attorney. I will explain these basic guidelines later.
In addition, Article 4 of the Act stipulates that it is the responsibility of the national government, etc. to promote the use of electronic power of attorney in public relations activities and electronic contracts to which one party is a party.
In addition, under Article 5 of this Act, there is a certification system for electronic power of attorney handling services. I will explain this later.
It is a slide about the function and necessity of electronic power of attorney.
With an electronic power of attorney, a mandator, such as a representative of this company or a sole proprietor, delegates authority to perform procedures to the mandatary or a person who performs the procedures on his / her behalf, and issues an electronic power of attorney. The mandatary or the person who performs the procedures on his / her behalf performs application procedures, etc. with the counterparty to the contract or the public authorities based on the delegated authority.
In addition, with regard to the counterparty to this contract, the content of the authority delegated by this mandator will be confirmed and procedures will be implemented.
The reliability of the electronic power of attorney is ensured by technical means such as electronic signatures and institutional means such as identity verification and standardization.
This is an image of electronic power of attorney handling services.
In the previous figure, it was explained that there was no electronic power of attorney handling business operator, but it is confirmed that the electronic power of attorney handling business operator is the person himself / herself of the mandator from the mandator, and that the mandator himself / herself is really trying to give the authority to the mandatary by confirming the identity of the mandator or other means, and by managing the status of the electronic power of attorney, such as storage and expiration, the electronic power of attorney is smoothly distributed.
It is a government ordinance or ministerial ordinance related to the Electronic Power of Attorney Act.
In the Ordinance for Enforcement of the Electronic Power of Attorney Act, it is specified what kind of electronic signature should be affixed to the specified electronic power of attorney and the procedures related to the approval.
It describes the basic guidelines for facilitating electronic power of attorney.
As I explained earlier, in Article 3 of the Act, the competent minister is to establish basic guidelines to promote the spread of electronic power of attorney. In addition, Article 3 of the Electronic Power of Attorney Act states what is to be stipulated in the basic guidelines. I will explain the contents of this from the next slide.
In addition, in order to clarify the interpretation of the Basic Guidelines, we have published a basic guideline explanation to promote the spread of electronic power of attorney.
This is an outline of the basic guidelines.
The significance and goal of the spread of electronic power of attorney is to contribute to the early realization of digital-first and the further spread of My Number Card.
In addition, the procedures for which the use of electronic power of attorney is expected to be promoted include procedures for electronic contracts and applications between companies, procedures for electronic bidding at national and public institutions and in the procurement of local governments, and procedures for online application to public authorities.
In addition, measures to deepen the understanding of relevant parties include the distribution of pamphlets and manuals, seminars, and the analysis and reflection of surveys of domestic and overseas trends.
It will be continued.
The Electronic Power of Attorney Act and these Basic Guidelines provide for three methods of recording the information recorded in the electronic power of attorney: the mandator record file method, the E-Certificate method, and the handling business operator record file method. In addition, each of these methods requires electronic signatures, etc. based on Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act. In addition, each method provides for what should be stated in the electronic power of attorney and what items should be included in the electronic power of attorney. An electronic power of attorney that meets these conditions is called a specified electronic power of attorney.
This is an explanation of the three methods. There are two main methods. One is a method in which a business operator handling an electronic power of attorney is entrusted by a mandator to create and record an electronic power of attorney. The other is a method in which a mandator creates an electronic power of attorney and passes it directly to the other party, or a method in which a business operator handling an electronic power of attorney stores it and presents it to the other party. There are two types.
In addition, regarding the content, the E-Certificate method is a method in which the authority, position, etc. are stated as the attributes of the E-Certificate, and by digitally signing the contract, etc. using the E-Certificate, the fact that the person has the attributes and the authority is securely conveyed to the counterparty to the contract.
In the Record File Method for Handling Business Operators, a business operator handling electronic power of attorney is entrusted by the mandator to record the content of the delegation and the authorized position, etc. in an electromagnetic record separate from the E-Certificate. In addition, the record is presented at the request of the other party. This method is, for example, to record the authority and delegation in a database separate from the My Number Card in combination with the My Number Card and present it to the other party.
As I mentioned earlier, the mandator record file method is a method in which an electronic power of attorney is created by the mandator, the representative of the company, or the sole proprietor. This is presented directly from the mandatary to the counterparty to the contract, or is presented to the counterparty after being stored by an electronic power of attorney handling business operator.
The image of the E-Certificate method, the image of the handling business operator record file method, and the image of the mandator record file method are shown on the slides, so please check them if you like.
As for this mandator record file method, there are two patterns on the slide, one is that the electronic power of attorney handling business operator is involved, and the other is that the electronic power of attorney is presented to the counterparty to the contract directly via the mandatary. Please take a look at them.
Regarding the electronic power of attorney stipulated in the Basic Guidelines that I explained earlier, we are explaining the matters to be recorded in the electronic power of attorney. For example, if you are a representative of a corporation, you must enter the corporate number, and if you are a sole proprietor, you can enter the business name at your discretion.
In each of the E-Certificate method, the mandator record file method, and the handling business operator record file method, what should be recorded and standardized is specified.
The Basic Guidelines also provide standards for certification of electronic power of attorney handling services. For example, electronic power of attorney shall confirm that the person, such as the representative of the corporation, has the intention to delegate his / her authority by confirming the validity of the electronic signature of the delegator or by confirming the certificate of registered matters and the certificate of seal impression. In addition, as a method for ensuring security, a system in compliance with the Information security Management System (ISMS) shall be constructed and certified. In addition, as for the E-Certificate method, it shall be inspected by Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act, WebTrust, or audited based on the standard of ETSI. In addition, it shall be stipulated that the CP/CPS, which defines the operation policy and operation procedure of the business, shall be prepared, and the status of the revocation of the electronic power of attorney shall be managed.
It is an explanation of the background of the legislation.
A major trend was the shift from a document-based and face-to-face system to a digital-first system, in which necessary measures were to be taken for public authorities procedures, private business procedures, and delegated procedures.
In addition, in particular, with regard to the procedures delegated by the representatives of this corporation, Article 10, Paragraph 3 of the Basic Act on the Advancement of Utilizing Public and Private Sector Data provides that the national government shall take legislative and other necessary measures so that a person who has been delegated by the representatives of the corporation can apply for a contract or perform other procedures exclusively using an electronic data processing organization. The Electronic Power of Attorney Act is the implementation of these legislative measures.
In addition, the Electronic Power of Attorney Act was formulated with the aim of resolving such Issue, the certification of delegated authority in the digital world, the digitalization of procedures across the public and private sectors, the consolidation and resolution of the Issue of existing electronic power of attorney, and the unification of procedures related to electronic procurement, in the form of approaching the goal of digital first if the problems of delegation and attribution certification in the digital world are solved in this large flow of digital first. Issue
In addition, this study was conducted by the "Sub-Working Group for Examination of Attribution Certification" and the "Sub-Working Group for Examination of Systems" established under the "Working Group for Utilization of Japanese Public Key Infrastructure (JPKI) Using Japanese Public Key Infrastructure (JPKI), etc." established under the "Panel on Promotion of Utilization of Individual Number Cards, ICT, etc." in Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications.
In addition, one of the reasons for the establishment of the Electronic Power of Attorney Act is the combination of My Number Card and electronic power of attorney. By using My Number Card and Japanese Public Key Infrastructure (JPKI), the name of the employee to whom the authority is delegated can be confirmed, and the employee's identity can be confirmed. In addition, the organization to which the employee belongs, the position, and the authority can be certified by using electronic power of attorney, which cannot be provided only by My Number Card and Japanese Public Key Infrastructure (JPKI). In this sense, electronic power of attorney and My Number Card are compatible in some ways. In that sense, it is stipulated that both will be widely used at the same time. My Number Card
In the My Number Card Utilization Promotion Roadmap of March 2017, the utilization of electronic power of attorney is also described in the form of use in government procurement. In addition, the utilization of My Number Card and electronic power of attorney is described in other cabinet decisions and basic policies.
That's all for the explanation. Mr. Uehara, nice to meet you.

Chairman Uehara: Thank you very much, Yes, thank you very much. Regarding the explanation from the Secretariat, if there are any questions or opinions from the members, please write them directly in the show of hands function or chat. I will appoint you. In addition, before speaking, since this is the first time, if you don't mind, I would like to ask you to introduce yourself briefly. What do you think?
Thank you, Imperial Household Commissioner.

Imperial Household Commissioner: I am Miyauchi . First of all, I would like to briefly introduce myself. I am currently working as an attorney. I originally worked as an engineer at NEC, and I am currently working as an attorney who understands the technology to some extent. So, I would like to ask you a simple comment about My Number Card and the electronic power of attorney on page 24. Could you please submit them?

Secretary Tonami: Thank you very much, Mr. I will share the screen again, so please wait a moment.

Imperial Household Commissioner: I am Miyauchi What is written here is very reasonable. However, one thing I can say is that if the electronic power of attorney is in the form of E-Certificate, it does not need to be a combination like this. Since E-Certificate is attached there, it can be done with only one electronic power of attorney. In that case, basically only the affiliation in the company or only the position should be indicated.
It is certainly possible to combine the My Number Card and the electronic power of attorney, but at present, in order to show that the two are the same person, it is necessary to confirm that the four pieces of information, name, address, date of birth, and sex, written on the electronic power of attorney are the same as those written on the JPKI and Japanese Public Key Infrastructure (JPKI) certificates, and that they are the same person. In that case, there are concerns about why I have to disclose my home address and date of birth even though I work for a company. For example, it would be good if I could write the serial number of the Japanese Public Key Infrastructure (JPKI), but it does not work well under the law, so in that sense, I think there are still various things to be done under the law.
First of all, this is one point, and the other is, can I open page 18? It is written lightly at the bottom, but this is revocation management. This is quite important, and one of the points is that you can take the trouble to have a certified business operator manage the certificate. I think it is possible to issue and issue it by yourself with an electronic power of attorney, but for example, if it is valid for a certain period of time, in the case of an electronic power of attorney such as a commuter pass, is it still valid? For example, if it was valid for more than six months, but it has been about three months, is it still OK? It is very important that a means to confirm is provided, and in that sense, we will do that properly. I think this business operator is one of the points of this law, and I think this is a very important point. I have made two comments. That is all.

Chairman Uehara: Thank you very much, . The secretariat's answers will be summarized later, so if you have any questions for other members, I would like to take them first. What do you think?
Mr. Itakura, nice to meet you.

Commissioner Itakura: Excuse me, .
My name is Itakura. I'm with a healthcare business company called Medley and I'm in charge of all of our security.
I have just joined the company recently, and until then I had been watching ID authentication-related matters such as security at Rakuten Bank, Microsoft Corporation, and International Business Machines Corporation. Therefore, in this committee, I would like to make some contributions from the perspective of private sector's participation and security.
I would like to make a comment rather than a question, but I believe there are various perspectives on the dissemination of electronic power of attorney. First of all, I am concerned about the mechanism, such as revocation management and whether or not to allow electronic power of attorney to have identifiers. First of all, I believe there is a Issue for making electronic power of attorney known.
In the materials, there were seminars and pamphlets for dissemination activities, but in fact, there are still companies that use power of attorney in paper form. For example, when you sign a contract by Internet fax, you need to verify your identity based on the Criminal Proceeds Act, and when I asked the parties concerned, they said they did not know about the electronic power of attorney system in the first place. These are some of the opinions. So, I would like to think about how to make people know about it. That's all.

Chairman Uehara: Thank you very much, .
Then, Mr. Hamaguchi, thank you very much.

Mr. Hamaguchi: I believe that Mr. Kasai and Mr. Itakura's comments earlier were echoed, but I believe there were also comments about the fact that non-certified electronic power of attorney is being used in a local local government, and that the use cases of where electronic power of attorney can be used must be organized. Keio SFC. Now, I would like to introduce myself. I, Keio SFC, am engaged in research and study of domestic and overseas systems and technical standards related to Trust, Trust services, and digital identity. In my position, I am engaged in third party audits, such as certification authority audits and timestamp audits. The place I would like to make a statement this time is page 22 of Material 2.
In the section on the spread of electronic power of attorney and the solution of Issue, I think it is written that the solution of Issue faced by delegation and attribution certification in the digital world is written toward a shift from face-to-face document principles and digital first.
One of the stated purposes of the Electronic Power of Attorney Act is to unify the procedures for electronic procurement and electronic bidding, and to a certain extent, the format and the description of the terms of delegation have been achieved. In addition, regarding Issue at the certification authority, the provisions on organization attributes, which are uniquely specified, have been unified, and the definition of authority has been clarified. I am very glad that the Electronic Power of Attorney Act has been established. As stated here, in addition to delegation, Issue still has attribute-based authentication. This time, I believe that attributes other than delegation, such as qualifications and degrees, will be excluded from the scope of the Review Committee on the Status of Enforcement of the Power Of Attorney Act. However, attributes, digital identity, and Trust services will be institutionalized together with delegation, and their legal effects will be confirmed, so I believe that fully digital-first digital completion will be realized. That is all.

Chairman Uehara: Thank you very much, .
Do you have any questions or comments from the other members? If there aren't any in particular, I would like to ask the Secretariat for your opinions and comments.

Secretary Chiba: I would like to add a comment from . I'm Secretary Chiba from Digital Agency.
With regard to the comments you have just made, I am aware that there was no question that the Secretariat did not understand, but I will make comments in order. First of all, as Mr. Miyauchi pointed out, there may be a problem in that if you link it with the four pieces of information, it is a problem of the company's business, but your personal home address will be disclosed. As you pointed out, there are restrictions under the Numbers Act, so I would like to take this point broadly as Issue and continue to consider what kind of method is possible.
In addition, for example, in the case of the mandator record file method, you pointed out that the role of the handling business operator is actually important, and I believe that is absolutely correct. We will continue to promote the spread of the method after this review meeting, so I would like to reflect the significance or position of the handling business operator and the benefits to the users by making a stronger appeal.
Next, I believe that we must take seriously the fact that it is not known in the first place, as pointed out by Mr. Itakura, and as you just suggested, we will conduct a survey to the extent that we can investigate the situation of its spread, including whether it is known to the people concerned or those who may be involved. In addition, I believe that we must solidify our footing in terms of how we will first make it known.
Finally, Mr. Hamaguchi pointed out that Issue is still recognized as a general entity for the certification of attributes. As stated in the materials, the Secretariat recognizes that Issue is still recognized as a general entity for the certification of attributes. Based on this review, we have been considering how the certification of attributes should be, not limited to delegation. We believe that we can continue to consider the certification of attributes in an integrated manner with delegation. I believe that Mr. Hamaguchi gave us a big hint for our future consideration.
That's all from the office.

Chairman Uehara: Thank you very much, .
That's all for agenda 1. If you have any questions, I think you can have a time close to a free discussion later, so I would like to pick them up there. Next, please explain from the secretariat on agenda 2.

Secretary Tonami: Thank you very much, Mr. I will now explain the status of enforcement of the Electronic Power of Attorney Act in accordance with Attachment 3. As an overall flow, I will explain the status of certification of services for handling electronic power of attorney as prescribed by the Act, the use of electronic power of attorney for services for handling electronic power of attorney and other cases of use of electronic power of attorney, and the outline of efforts related to the responsibilities of the State, etc. as prescribed in Article 4 of the Act, such as public relations efforts, survey and research, and reflection of the results of the survey and research.
First of all, it is about the status of certification of electronic power of attorney handling services.
As I explained in the outline earlier, Article 5 of the Act stipulates the certification system for electronic power of attorney handling services.
The purpose of this certification is to certify electronic power of attorney handling business operators that meet the standards, to ensure that the delegation is based on the intention of the representatives of existing corporations, to ensure that technical measures are taken that have not been modified by third parties, and to ensure the circulation of highly reliable electronic power of attorney secured by security standards.
With regard to certification of services for handling electronic power of attorney, nine services of six companies have been certified so far. Six services are certified using the E-Certificate method, one service is certified using the mandator record file method, and two services are certified using the business operator record file method. A list of business operators certified for services for handling electronic power of attorney and a list of certified services are posted on the next page.
The electronic power of attorney of a business operator who has been certified as a business operator handling electronic power of attorney can be used for electronic contracts between companies by describing administrative procedures such as e-Tax, national tax, eLTAX, local tax, GEPS, and electronic bidding systems, and the content of the delegation, for example, the authority to conclude contracts at the Kansai Branch.
This is a list of business operators who are certified to handle electronic power of attorney.
This is an explanation on the use of electronic power of attorney.
The use of electronic power of attorney can be broadly divided into use with public authorities and use between businesses.
This BtoG. For the delegation of business, corporate representatives, or sole proprietorships to take some procedures with public authorities, the electronic power of attorney of the certified electronic power of attorney handling business operator can be used in e-Tax, eLTAX, and GEPS as I mentioned earlier. In addition, although it is not the electronic power of attorney of the certified electronic power of attorney handling business operator, the electronic power of attorney by the proprietary system can be used in some government systems.
In addition, as I mentioned earlier, electronic power of attorney can be used for concluding contracts between companies.
In addition, finally, regarding the CtoG part, although it is outside the definition of an electronic power of attorney in Article 2 of the Electronic Power of Attorney Act, the use of an electronic power of attorney in local local government procedures is carried out by our own system.
In this Study Group, we would like to have a major study not only on expanding the use of electronic power of attorney by BtoG and certified electronic power of attorney business operators, but also on further expanding the use of BtoB for concluding electronic contracts, how to use BtoB, and whether it can be used for other things.
In addition to that, although it is outside the definition of the Electronic Power of Attorney Act, there is much overlap in the use of electronic power of attorney in administrative procedures for ordinary citizens, such as standardization, so at the same time, I would like to discuss this.
It is about the use of electronic power of attorney for e-Tax.
In the use of electronic power of attorney in e-Tax, the representative, etc. of a corporation may delegate to an employee, etc., and the employee may file a tax return.
With regard to the use of electronic power of attorney in GEPS, it is possible for employees, etc. to use the authority to bid on behalf of corporate representatives by using electronic power of attorney. GEPS supports all three types of electronic power of attorney methods specified in the Basic Guidelines handled by certified electronic power of attorney handling business operators. In addition, it is possible to register an agent using My Number Card for two of these businesses.
With regard to bidding using My Number Card, under the evaluation system in procurement, etc. related to information systems for the spread of My Number Card, etc., preferential treatment, for example, 3 points out of 100 points for the bidding, etc., can be obtained for the evaluation points specified in each procurement.
This evaluation system is explained on the next slide.
In addition, as I briefly mentioned earlier about the use of electronic power of attorney in a local local government, in some local government, it is possible to apply for proxy using an electronic power of attorney based on a proprietary system. Regarding the actual use of electronic power of attorney in this local local government, we are currently investigating and organizing it, so we would like to report it at the second review meeting. We plan to hold a hearing in Digital Agency to use it as a material for consideration on the points we would like the government to address.
Finally, I would like to outline the efforts related to the responsibilities of the Government, etc.
Article 4 of the Electronic Power of Attorney Act. The State shall endeavor to deepen the understanding of electronic power of attorney by the parties to electronic contracts and other related parties through public relations activities. In addition, it is specified that the State shall investigate and analyze trends in the content of electronic power of attorney, provide the results obtained through such investigation, and promote measures necessary to promote the use of electronic power of attorney by the business operator of the other party in electronic contracts in which the State is one party.
For each of these efforts, we are working on our responsibilities in the form of public relations, research, and responses to various systems, particularly in the bidding system.
Regarding public relations and other efforts, we have been publishing in such magazines. In addition, regarding lectures, we have been conducting lectures at the Tokyo Certified Public Tax Accountants Association, JIIMA, and the Japan Documentation and Information Management Association.
As for the survey and research, as I mentioned earlier, the results of the survey and research are reflected in the form of using them to solve Issue for dissemination and to revise the Basic Guidelines.
We have conducted such surveys and research, and based on the results of the surveys, we have formulated the first version of the Basic Guidelines and the first Explanation of the Basic Guidelines. Based on the results of the surveys, we have revised the Explanation of the Basic Guidelines and specified how to utilize My Number Card.
That is all for the explanation on the enforcement status of the electronic power of attorney.
Thank you, Mr. Uehara.

Chairman Uehara: Thank you very much, . Then, if you have any questions or opinions, please let us know by a show of hands or chat function. We will appoint you. What do you think?
Thank you, Imperial Household Commissioner.

Imperial Household Commissioner: I am Miyauchi . You have talked about the current status of enforcement of this law in various ways, but I believe that BtoB is very important in the sense that I and the number of business operators will come out. In BtoB, of course, there are many cases where signatures or seals of representative directors are used, including electronic signatures, but there are very many cases where they are not. For example, if there is a Kansai branch office, there are many cases where transactions are made with the seal of the Kansai branch manager. It is usually considered that by giving the title of Kansai branch manager, all extra-judicial authority related to the Kansai branch is given, and I think this is in the form of approval given to a specific case under Article 14 of the Companies Act or Article 25 of the Commercial Code. And this can be done with an electronic power of attorney. As mentioned in Material 2, in fact, with an electronic power of attorney, the content of the mandate can be indicated only by the title. Therefore, in this example, by writing "I am the Kansai branch manager," the content of the mandate can be indicated by giving all the authority associated with it. Looking at this, I think it can be said that it is actually the same as submitting a combination of a E-Certificate and a business card under the responsibility of the company. This is like an electronic employee ID card, and within the company, a position, a title, and a E-Certificate related to it, can be used to make a contract. Therefore, by creating an electronic power of attorney in the form of an employee ID card, the use of this electronic power of attorney will expand, and I think that it will be possible for business operators to see a large number of electronic power of attorney.
However, there are various types of contracts by executives, from the most important to the least important. Among them, I believe that there are users of electronic employee IDs issued by companies that are not certified. I believe it is necessary to consider how to use them, even if they are not certified.
That's all from me.

Chairman Uehara: Thank you very much, . Are there any comments from other members?
Thank you, Mr. Kasai.

Member KASAI: First of all, I would like to introduce myself. I am in charge of digital lobbying in the convenience store industry at LAWSON, Inc.. I have been transferred to the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry for about two years, and I have been operating the digital-related certification system.
Although it is not a field that I am directly involved in, I would like to share your opinion on how to make it easier for companies to use and how to spread it.
One point I would like to ask is about the hearing in local government that was posted on page 11. I am not sure about it, or you have a question. There is an application by proxy using an electronic power of attorney based on an original system. Even though there is a certification system under the law, I think there is a reason why you use a different system or an original mechanism. Next, I will ask you about the certification system because it is the subject of the hearing, but I was very concerned about the fact that you took the trouble to use a new mechanism.
The reason is that, regarding the electronic power of attorney under the Electronic Power of Attorney Act, if there are two methods that are certified as original for the term electronic power of attorney, and if there is a need for a highly reliable system, if some problem occurs in the original system, it will affect the certification system. We are also concerned about the reputation of the system. The background of why it came to be like this may be a Issue for its spread, so I hope to consider it after the second round. That's all.

Chairman Uehara: Thank you very much, . Then, Mr. Itakura, nice to meet you.

Commissioner Itakura: Excuse me, :
The other point may be related to what Mr. Kasai said earlier, but I think there are still many systems that do not support electronic power of attorney, and I feel that it is necessary to promote systematic responses, including administrative responses. That's all.

Chairman Uehara: Thank you very much, . Then, Mr. Hamaguchi, I would like to ask for your continued support.

Chairman Uehara: Thank you very much, . Do you have any other questions? If not, I would like to make some comments.
As the Imperial Household Committee mentioned earlier, as you understand, it is very important to increase the number of BtoBs.
I believe there was a discussion about the expansion of original goods in the previous opinion. On the other hand, with regard to the actual contract between the people, it is actually only necessary to have a seal in the Code of Civil Procedure. In addition, in the first place, there are various forms of contracts, so I don't think it is necessary to be bound by detailed regulations. However, I think that various measures should be taken to spread contracts based on electronic power of attorney as a standard method. In particular, I think that it is important to promote so-called electronic contracts in the first place. In particular, in the field of civil engineering and construction, where there are many contracts with large amounts, electronic contracts have spread with the incentive of saving stamp tax in the first place. I think that it is good to spread electronic power of attorney to other fields gradually if you become a driver.
In addition, regarding the use of electronic power of attorney in local governments, there is a historical background, and in fact, local government started it at a different timing from the government's electronic contract, so-called online application, so I wonder if it has been possible to create its own electronic power of attorney. I believe that standardization will be possible as various systems are taken over by Government Cloud in the future digital government, but in any case, it will be quite difficult to take over what has already begun as a standard, so I feel that we must be careful in this local government. That is all.
Then, from the secretariat, if you don't mind, please give us your comments.

Secretary Tonami: Thank you very much, Mr. and comment on the use in the local local government as pointed out by Mr. Kasai and Mr. Itakura.
Regarding the use of the original system by a local local government, although we are currently investigating the matter, mainly regarding the consideration of the Electronic Power of Attorney Act, one of the main purposes is to promote electronic contracts for corporations by enabling in-house representation and in-house delegation, and there are parts that have been carried out for such purposes. In addition, even before the Electronic Power of Attorney Act was enacted and before the consideration of the Electronic Power of Attorney Act, in order to enable the use of electronic power of attorney, particularly the digitization and online application of procedures that had been performed using paper power of attorney, in the local local government or other government information systems, an original system was developed to create an electronic power of attorney for the original system. When the paper power of attorney was digitized, the procedure for delegation could not be performed. To solve this problem, an original system was developed.
Regarding these points, I believe that there are of course good points that could be standardized, but there is also the perspective of local autonomy, and there are current trends in My Number Card and elsewhere, so I believe that the Study Group and the Government of Japan will have to consider how this should be done. First of all, I made a comment on that.

Secretary Chiba: I would like to add a comment from With regard to the comments you just made, what I can say in common with the comments by Mr. Miyauchi, Mr. Kasai, and Mr. Itakura is that they are important, and I am sorry Mr. Hamaguchi. Depending on the degree of importance and the use cases, for example, it may not be appropriate to separate important contracts from non-important contracts, but depending on the degree of importance, for example, contracts that use a particularly reliable electronic power of attorney, such as those that have been certified, or contracts that are free of liability even if they have not been certified, we may pursue the possibility of using them in a balanced manner. I believe that is what you pointed out.
On the other hand, I believe that this is basically as you said. On the other hand, with regard to what is difficult, as you are all aware, for example, we held a study group called the Sub-Working Group on Trust last year. We can understand very well that such a classification is required, but in the end, the content of the specific contract and the various situations differ from case to case, so it is quite difficult to make a general correspondence in such a case, even if it is somewhat wide.
Although such studies and attempts have been made, I believe that the actual situation is that they have not been successful.
On the other hand, I do not think that we should stop just because it is difficult, so I believe that we will not give up and will pursue such an attempt, including in what ways we can present it. Therefore, I believe that it will also be included in the scope of this Study Group, and I would be very grateful if the members of the Study Group would continue to give us ideas and suggestions on how to make a classification that is not too general and does not exclude individual cases.
Next, Mr. Uehara said that saving stamp tax would be a major incentive. This is exactly the case with electronic contracts. As is the case with Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act, I believe that you are correct in pointing out the importance of promoting electronic contracts.
At the time of Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act, we have always said that the saving of stamp tax will be an incentive for electronic contracts. As you said, the amount of contract is particularly large. For example, is there a sales contract for real estate? I think it is BtoC. So, first of all, we would like to find out where to spread it, and then we would like to fully consider the method of digging up from there.
In addition, as I mentioned earlier, regarding the reputation risk pointed out by Commissioner Kasai, as you said, when there are systems that are approved and those that are not, there is a part that can be seen as a single category of electronic power of attorney. We do not necessarily understand all of the matters outside the approval systems, and basically, there is no current legal system that requires companies in local government or private sector to do their own things. Based on your comments, I would like to ask what kind of electronic power of attorney is used for purposes other than approval as much as possible. If it is used very much in some cases, I believe it will contribute to considering how to make it easier to use by taking a cue from that. From that perspective, I would like to expand the scope of our investigation a little further.
That's all from the office. I'm sorry if there are any omissions.

Chairman Uehara: Thank you very much, . Thank you.

Imperial Household Commissioner: I am Miyauchi . It is probably impossible to clearly distinguish between what is certified and what is not. That is as you say, but in reality, even in the current society, each company has its own way of thinking about how to use the company's registered seal and how to use a simpler seal. Therefore, it is probably impossible for the government to create clear standards for this. That is as you say, but based on the various ways of doing things so far, I think it is possible to show that this can be used in cases like this, in the form of an example. Even if it is said that the personal E-Certificate of E-Certificate is used differently from the case of specific authentication services without certification, there is no clear division anymore. Based on when the registered seal is used, or what is reported to somewhere, such as a bank report, etc., each business operator has to consider how well the issuing business operator is doing.
The committee and various national organizations can provide hints on how to use them differently, but in the end, I would like to have each business operator use them differently based on their own ideas. That is all.

Chairman Uehara: Thank you very much, . Do you have any comments from the Secretariat on what you just said?

Secretary Chiba: I would like to add a comment from , thank you very much.
I believe that is exactly what you said, and I believe that there is sufficient room for us to present guidelines in the form of examples, for example.
On the other hand, it is not good if it is taken as if I do not want to do it, but as Dr. Miyauchi has well guided us, for example, even if it is a method like an example, it is often taken as a kind of demarcation because it is what the government is saying, so I think we must be very careful about how we show it. So, I would be very grateful if you could continue to give us hints or suggestions about how it is received. As you pointed out, I believe that is absolutely correct. That is all.

Chairman Uehara: Thank you very much, . If you have any comments from Mr. Itakura, I would appreciate it.

Commissioner Itakura: Excuse me, , briefly. In the end, using electronic power of attorney is all about what you want to secure, what kind of risks you want to avoid, and how you want to reduce them. As Mr. Miyauchi said earlier, I think it is necessary for business operators to make decisions on the concept of risk. On the other hand, as Mr. Kasai said earlier, in order to reduce reputation risk, at least what should be required of the original system. For example, the Electronic Power of Attorney Act, the security level required for electronic power of attorney, and the standards for the mechanism, we should create and present them. Or if the original system is working well, we can learn from it and create guidelines for the standard electronic power of attorney, such as the mechanism should be like this, and the revocation management should be done like this. I think governance can be effective even if there are many at a certain level, and I think such an approach is also necessary.

Chairman Uehara: Thank you very much, . Is there anything from the Secretariat?

Secretary Chiba: I would like to add a comment from Thank you very much. I believe that all the matters you just pointed out are correct. For example, regarding the certification system for electronic power of attorney, as I explained earlier, I believe that a certain level or standard is indicated in the law or guidelines.
On the other hand, although it is related to reputation risk, I believe that other electronic power of attorney, such as IT'S ME SIGNATURE in electronic signatures, will be released in the world at a rapid pace, and it is difficult to make decisions in advance in such cases, but for example, certification means that the minimum security is guaranteed in the same way as Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act certification, and this certification guarantees such a thing, but even if it is not certified, it does not prevent users and businesses from using it at their discretion in the end.
Since it is set up in this way, I believe that it will be effective to a certain extent to emphasize and appeal the points of recognition.
However, going back to what I said earlier, I am wondering how we will properly disseminate it and whether it will be truly known. One answer is that we will make an appeal to the public by explaining that the government guarantees this recognition.

Chairman Uehara: Thank you very much, , please allow me to conclude my remarks on agenda 2.
Please continue to provide explanations by the Secretariat on agenda 3.

Secretary Tonami: Thank you very much, Mr. Then, I would like to explain how to proceed from the next time based on Material 4.
As for how to proceed from the next time, in the second round, we plan to report on the results of the questionnaire, which we will confirm later, and report on the use of electronic power of attorney in the local local government, as mentioned earlier.
In addition, in order to discuss the direction of future efforts, we would like to hold hearings from related organizations that are expected to use electronic power of attorney in either the second or third round. In addition, regarding the direction of future efforts, we would like to hear various opinions from the members of the Committee as a free debate.
In the third session, I would like to discuss the direction of future efforts following the second session, and then discuss the outline of the implementation status report and the final report in the third session.
In the fourth and final round, the Secretariat will indicate that it would like to make this report on the status of implementation, so we would like to revise it and ask for your opinions.
It is about the questionnaire and hearing to be conducted from next time.
We would like to conduct two types of questionnaires, one for certified electronic power of attorney handling business operators and business operators who are certified, and the other for system operators who accept electronic power of attorney from certified electronic power of attorney handling business operators.
In addition, the Secretariat has set up several candidates for related organizations, etc. that are expected to be utilized as the subject of hearings by the Review Committee. In particular, based on the points discussed so far in the first meeting, if you would like to ask about these points in the questionnaire, or if you would like to invite these people to hold hearings, we would like to hear their opinions.
I would like to ask for your opinions at the end after explaining both the questionnaire and the hearing.
Certification of Electronic Power of Attorney This is a questionnaire on system operators who accept electronic power of attorney from electronic power of attorney handling business operators. First of all, as a matter related to the status of use of electronic power of attorney, we would like to receive answers on the procedures using electronic power of attorney currently available in each system.
In addition, we would like to receive information on the number of applications for procedures in which electronic power of attorney can be used and the number of electronic power of attorney used among them to the extent possible. In addition, we would like to receive information on the use of paper power of attorney for procedures in which paper power of attorney is still available, so that we can compare the use of paper power of attorney with that of electronic power of attorney.
In addition, with regard to the questions on the future direction and expansion of use, we would like you to answer the questions about the goals of the image of each system related to the use of electronic power of attorney, as well as the points that it is good to expand the use of electronic power of attorney in the future, and the points that we would like you to take such measures, in a way that you can select and write freely, such as expanding public relations and functions, and responding to remote certification.
We would like to receive requests for other systems.
With regard to the questionnaire to be sent to certified electronic power of attorney handling business operators, in terms of the status of use of electronic power of attorney, we would like to ask about the procedures that are currently available and the forms of use of electronic power of attorney that are understood by each company, for example, if you understand that it seems to be used in business other than government systems.
In addition, with regard to questions on the future expansion of use, we believe that there are obstacles to the spread of use in current uses, such as use in government systems, use in business, and use in electronic contracts. We would like to ask about new uses that are expected to be further utilized other than the current uses, obstacles to the expansion of use in new uses other than the current uses, and other system-related requests.
In the second and third hearings, I would like to ask questions from such professional organizations as the Japanese Federation of Bar Associations, the Japanese Federation of Certified Administrative Procedures Legal Specialists Associations, the Japanese Federation of Judicial Scriveners Associations, and the Japan Federation of CPTAs' Associations, which are entrusted and act as agents on a regular basis.
I would like to hear the opinions of the committee members. Mr. Uehara, please.

Chairman Uehara: Thank you very much, , if you have any opinions, please let us know your opinions and intentions through chat or the show of hands function.
Yes, Mr. Kasai, nice to meet you.

Member KASAI:
I am also in charge of contracts with companies, but within each rule, when the contract is pulled out again at the end, it is the audit check of the audit firm, so I think it is easy to check why the Electronic Power of Attorney Act, electronic contracts, and electronic signatures are necessary. For example, if you can see some types, such as a case of dealing with a company for the first time or a case where the scale of the contract is large, I think you can get a hint about whether it is a certification that it is better to be strict or whether you will create an original system.
In addition, I would like to ask another question. From the company side, electronic power of attorney is not so common in the first place, so electronic power of attorney is quite difficult for me. Therefore, I think the step is that there is an electronic contract, an electronic signature, and a step to confirm whether or not the person is really the person himself. It is difficult to do it with the person himself, but I think it is a step to have a power of attorney when I want to ensure the strictness. This review meeting is only for power of attorney, but I thought it would be easier to explain if the preliminary steps could be presented to the company side when there is a case like this in public relations. That's all.

Chairman Uehara: Thank you very much, . Do you have any comments or questions from the other members? Is that okay?
If not, I would like to ask the secretariat for your opinion on Mr. Kasai's question earlier.

Secretary Tonami: Thank you very much, Mr. Kasai that it would be good to hear from not only related organizations that are expected to use the hearing but also from people who are doing such things from the perspective of auditing, I would like to prepare a person who can ask such points in either the second or third round, although I will consider what kind of organizations, companies, and people I should ask. In addition, on the second point, on the contrary, I would like to ask this question. Regarding the point that it would be good to indicate something about the steps before using an electronic contract, electronic signature, or electronic power of attorney, is it correct to say that this is not the subject of the hearing or the content of the questionnaire, but is it correct to say that I would like to include this in the schedule from next time on?

Member KASAI: I'm sorry. I did it in the form of the opinions of the whole, but in the questionnaire, I myself don't know whether it is really good to hear only about the power of attorney. As I said earlier, I feel that it is the next step after there are procedures such as electronic signatures and whether you are the person himself or herself. I was a little concerned about whether we can finally get some hints just from the number of reasons for hearing directly from the power of attorney alone, or whether there are any hints in the process of getting there.
Mainly, as a public relations activity, from the perspective of the company, this is what we see as a whole, so I have included this as a general opinion.
I thought it would be a bit of a waste if a questionnaire such as "There is no contract between companies, that's all" was used with an electronic power of attorney, so I thought that there might be a need for a little ingenuity that does not end with that, although I'm sorry, I don't have a solution.

Secretary Tonami: Thank you very much, Mr. . However, since there will be a third meeting, shall we prepare for it again in the second meeting and ask what kind of questions we should ask? In addition, we would like to confirm with the members outside the Review Meeting that we should ask them about it, and we would like to conduct a questionnaire and make efforts so that we can find out something about the situation of its use as well as such questions. private sector

Member KASAI: I see. Thank you very much.

Chairman Uehara: Thank you very much, Yes. Then, Mr. Itakura, thank you for your statement.

Commissioner Itakura: Excuse me, , I don't think this company is particularly good, but I think we should include some of private sector's opinions. I think there is a chance that we can use it where electronic power of attorney is not used. As I said briefly earlier, when we sign a contract for Internet fax or in the context of digital identity, when we skip SMS authentication, we use power of attorney to confirm our identity and sign a contract, so I think we can consider it a little broader.

Chairman Uehara: Thank you very much, Secretariat?

Secretary Tonami: Thank you very much, Mr. Yes, regarding the point made by Commissioner Itakura that it would be good if we could listen to the voices of private sector, I think it is difficult to respond here, but I think we need to think again about what specific points we should ask and who we should ask about the companies that do not use them. I would like to ask for your opinions in the second round or other occasions. I would like to include such people in the questionnaire and hearings, and I would like to ask the Secretariat to ask such companies, and I would like to ask for the opinions of Digital Agency outside the Review Committee.

Chairman Uehara: Thank you very much, Excuse me for a moment. I would like to add this to Mr. Itakura's comment earlier, but I think one of the possible interviewees is a company that has started an electronic contract service, such as an electronic signature using a third party signature, because electronic contracts need to be advanced during the COVID-19 pandemic. This is probably why electronic power of attorney is not used so often.
So, I thought it would be good to ask some companies that handle such electronic contracts and are not yet able to use electronic power of attorney where the barriers are. I would like you to consider it.
Are there any opinions from other members? Are there any comments? Mr. Yamaguchi, please.

Commissioner Yamaguchi: Good morning, . I'm Yamaguchi from the University of Tokyo. I was wondering when to make a statement, and it was the last time. I'm sorry.
I am an Information security at the University of Tokyo. I am engaged in research on privacy protection from the perspective of machine learning and data analysis. Recently, I have been conducting research on personal authentication using data from personal authentication lifelogs. Speaking of my career, I have been working at the Information security Center of the Cabinet Secretariat, which has now changed its name to the Cyber security Center, for about four years. I was in charge of the Crypto transition, which is 10 years old crypto, although it is not the most popular crypto transition recently. While listening to what you have been saying, I think it is natural that private sector should be included, but I am not sure where to focus on, so I thought it would be difficult to discuss this, while listening to Mr. Tonami's opinions.
This is because the electronic power of attorney itself is based on a Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act created by a signed certified business operator. In other words, I think that matters that are assumed to be quite strict, so-called registered seals, were originally assumed.
However, the opinions expressed here have been expanded to include outsourcing to people a little more easily, so it seems to me that the balance is very bad.
In terms of how to correct this balance, if we are going to spread it, it is better to shift to something that can be used more easily, rather than based on the Signature Act, as has been mentioned in local government, and it is better to be stricter in order to match the original system design, so I heard it was difficult to decide which system to match while listening to the discussion.
My personal opinion is that I started this project because I wanted to spread it. Rather than focusing on the current situation, which is too strict, I think we need to discuss how to organize it, including more fluffy things. But if we do it too much, it may become a general theory. If it is difficult, I think it is better to reduce it to a specific level. I am sorry that I have been saying it is difficult. That is all from me.

Chairman Uehara: Thank you very much, Itakura, I understand you have questions, but I would like to pick them up first.

Commissioner Itakura: Excuse me, . I'm a little confused about what to say, but I'm a little away from what I want to hear about private sector now. I thought about whether there is any room for hearings or a sense of Issue about certified business operators or those who have the possibility of becoming certified business operators.
I think it will be a theme after the 3rd and 4th meetings. Currently, certified business operators have been doing electronic signatures, and I think the obstacles to becoming a certified business operator were relatively low. However, as a mechanism, if a blocker is a viewpoint of a certified business operator when making a implementation, I would like to be able to pick up on that. It is like a question and comment.

Chairman Uehara: Thank you very much, . If there is any comment from the Secretariat, I would appreciate it.

Secretary Tonami: Thank you very much, Mr. I would like to touch on whether it would be good to hear from certified business operators and others from Commissioner Itakura, but since five of the six companies handling electronic power of attorney are also certified business operators of Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act, I believe that there are some parts that can be covered by the questionnaire to the certified electronic power of attorney handling business operators. In particular, regarding the points I just asked about, I believe that you can pick them up at a place where the factors hindering their spread are described.
I believe that Commissioner Yamaguchi's opinion is reasonable, but in that sense, I believe that it is important to clearly indicate the level of electronic power of attorney for each Trust, for example, that there are cases where electronic power of attorney can be used even if it is not the electronic power of attorney for certification, even if there is no significant change in the future policies, in order to proceed while achieving both of the two. That is to say, it is important to clearly indicate the level of electronic power of attorney for each use cases.

Secretary Chiba: I would like to add a comment from .
I believe that Commissioner Yamaguchi's comments are absolutely correct, and I believe that many of the comments made so far have been included. There are always similar discussions in Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act. Even though Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act is a law that is more than 20 years old, what is drawing particular attention is that, as Chairman Uehara pointed out, contracts will also be made electronic during the novel coronavirus pandemic, and I believe that it has once again been in the spotlight. As you are all aware, there is a systematic history of more than 100 years for seal impressions, seals, and seals, and there are no specific provisions in national law on how to certify a uniform seal impression or on the seal registration system, but on the surface, a local local government registers a seal impression. Although it is regarded as a registered seal with quite high probative value, I believe that there are basically no provisions on what kind of certification strength there is under any law or law for a registered seal, an unregistered seal, or a sanmonban.
I believe that this has been conventionally established and solidified over a history of more than 100 years, and I believe that one of the reasons why it is difficult to classify the level is that the story of electronics has been going into such a place over a history of only 20 years. Therefore, in law, only so-called registered seal level has been defined, and I believe that it is completely true that the balance is poor.
Therefore, I would like to repeat what I have said so far, but as a standard in law, a strict standard should be a strict standard. However, I would like to give an example of a standard or guideline that is a little lower than that, and there are cases like this, and in cases like this, it is okay not to be so strict, but the administration is not good at saying this, but we should pursue this. If we do not do so, we will have to wait for another 100 years for the system of electronic signatures and power of attorney to replace the so-called seal of approval and three letter seal. So, I would like to put a little gear into it, and there are parts that cannot be progressed just by being aware of them and leaving them to custom. So, I believe that there is something that we should be aware of and make efforts to show such a classification. That is all.

Chairman Uehara: Thank you very much, .
This is Mr. Chiba's final story. In any case, seals and impressions have been relatively soft to the touch, and it is easy to imagine how they are used by everyone. It is possible to accumulate customs in the world to some extent, but it is difficult to spread them even if you leave them alone. For example, electronic signatures are technically a black box that ordinary people do not understand. Therefore, I think that it will be difficult to spread them even if you leave them alone. Therefore, I think that it will be difficult to spread them even if you do not show that they can be used in this way while the government shows guidelines to some extent. Therefore, it is a good timing that electronic contracts have suddenly moved into gear, so I hope that we can find a way to spread them through this review meeting. Thank you very much.
In addition, if there is no particular opinion from the members, I would like to conclude my remarks on Agenda 3. Thank you very much.
Then I would like to return it to the office.

Secretary Tonami: Thank you very much, Mr. , for your active discussions. The opinions we received today will be reflected in the next and subsequent agenda items.
The minutes of today's meeting will be posted on the Digital Agency website after confirmation by the members at a later date.
In addition, we will once again adjust the schedule for the next review meeting. I would like to thank all the members for your continued support.
This concludes the first meeting of the Electronic Power of Attorney Enforcement Status Review Meeting. Thank you very much, everyone.

End