Japans „Koexistenz“-Ministerin Kimi Onoda: „Ein dauerhafter Aufenthalt ist kein Recht. Es handelt sich um eine ‚Erlaubnis‘, die nach Erfüllung der Anforderungen erteilt wird. Wenn man von ‚dauerhaftem Aufenthalt‘ spricht, kann das missverstanden werden, als wäre es ein Recht, daher möchte ich Sie bitten, vorsichtig zu sein, wenn Sie darüber sprechen.“

Is this an inaccurate definition?
This is always how I have perceived it, in any country.

This chick is sooooo hurt 😂
She cannot accept that she’ll never be a real, fully native Japanese person. So instead of improving the lives of other half-Japanese people like herself, she wants to make it more difficult for their foreign parents to exist in Japan. Probably like her father 🤭

she can kiss the fattest part of my ass.

Struggling to see the controversy here

She ain’t wrong. It IS a privilege, no matter what anyone says. But it shouldn’t be taken away willy nilly either. Anyways, why is she talking about it?

I mean sure, but if you’re granted “permission” to drive with your driver’s license for example, don’t you have the “right” to drive? She should focus on answering the question instead of playing word games here and there

She isn’t wrong at all. Right message, wrong messenger.

The hypocrisy of saying this BS about visa requirements from this fool, that kept an illegal dual citizenship for most of her life.

Japan has countless of permanent residents with a longer japanese citizenship of her.

Says the half Japanese women with severe gaijin daddy issues who used to illegally hold US and Japanese citizenship.

Permanent residency quite literally means you have the right to live in a country permanently..

I don’t like her but how is she wrong here? It’s not a right. It’s something you earn and agree to.

she’s so insufferable. self hating hafu.

The framing distinction she’s making is legally and philosophically accurate, permanent residency is universally a discretionary grant by a sovereign state, not an inherent entitlement. Even in countries with relatively liberal immigration systems, the state retains the authority to deny, revoke, or condition it.
The closest thing to an exception might be cases where long-term residents successfully argue before courts that denial or revocation violates human rights protections, the ECHR has produced rulings along those lines in Europe, where deep family and social ties can constrain a state’s ability to expel someone. But even that’s not „permanent residency is a right,“ it’s more „we can’t remove you under these specific circumstances,“ which is a different thing.
Her actual target was pretty transparent though, she’s correcting the journalist’s terminology while also implicitly pushing back on the framing that any foreign national is owed a pathway. The „life-hacking“ comment at the end was the more substantive signal: they’re looking at whether the points system has been gamed, which it probably has to some extent given how specific the criteria get.
The journalist’s question itself was a fairly loaded one. „Large numbers of Chinese people exploiting anime schools to get residency“ is a specific claim that would need real data to back up, and it was framed more as an assertion than a question.

The ultimate „pick me“ gaijin

Well, lets just check what she said (I am a PR in Japan):

*“Permanent residency is not a right. It is ‚permit‘ granted after meeting the requirements,*
–> yes, it’s true. It’s a visa you get after applying for it if you meet the requirements after living in Japan for years, paying your taxes, not being engaged in criminal activities etc..

*if you say ‚permanent residency,‘ it can be misunderstood as if it were a right, so I would like you to be careful when speaking about it”*

–> No, it cannot be misunderstood as a right. Only idiots would think a PR is a „right“.

I worked hard to get this, abided by the rules, paid a lot of taxes. I’m happy they keep it this way. Why would it be handed like candies? Just because you snowflakes think it should,.. „everybody has the right to blablabla?“

Well, it never worked this way in Japan. It’s not Europe here.

Way to butcher the title and the context.

永住権 does not translate to “Permanent Residency”but “Right to Permanent Residency”. The topic here is about 永住許可, which is “Permanent Residency Permit”. One would need to apply for a permit in order to obtain the right. Not directly applying for the right. So, it makes sense that the terms need to be differentiated

I will be real fam. Every time she goes on TV I get a cortisol spike its „what the fuck is coming our way now???“