A Japanese lawmaker is seeking amendments to a privacy bill that would allow the collection of sensitive medical data without individual consent [1].

The proposal represents a significant shift in how the state handles "care-required personal information." If passed, the law could grant government bodies and municipalities broad authority to access private health records, potentially undermining existing privacy protections for citizens.

During a House of Representatives plenary session on May 12 [1], Rep. Nagatsuma of the Center for Reform questioned Digital Minister Matsumoto regarding the scope of the Personal Information Protection Act amendment. Nagatsuma asked if local governments would be able to obtain non-public medical history, including names, of residents for the purpose of creating statistics [1].

Minister Matsumoto said that when local governments use such information for statistical creation, the acquisition of non-public medical information of residents would be possible [1].

Nagatsuma responded by asking for confirmation that this process would occur without the consent of the individual [1]. The lawmaker argued that obtaining sensitive data such as medical history without a person's agreement is inappropriate from a privacy perspective. Nagatsuma said that such information should be deleted before it is provided [1].

The debate centers on the balance between administrative efficiency in data collection and the fundamental right to medical privacy. The current proposal extends the ability to collect not only names and addresses, but also highly sensitive personal data for government use [1].

“"Basically, when local governments use it for statistical creation, this non-public medical information... becomes possible to acquire."”

This legislative conflict highlights a growing tension in Japan between the push for a 'Digital Agency' driven state—which relies on big data for policy and statistics—and the strict protections surrounding sensitive personal information. By allowing the collection of medical histories without consent, the government risks a public backlash over surveillance and data misuse, while the opposition views the amendment as a breach of bodily and informational autonomy.