Japan

Article 71 of the Industrial Safety and Health Act mandates employers to “endeavor to create a comfortable working environment.” Ministry of Labour, Health and Welfare Notification No. 59 implements Article 71 and asks employers to take “measures . . . against smoking, such as designating smoking areas within the workplace, etc.” The 2003 Workplace Guidelines specify: “To the extent possible, smoking rooms shall be installed; if difficulties arise in the installation of smoking rooms, a smoking corner shall be established.” The 2003 Workplace Guidelines provide standards for smoking rooms, if established, as follows: 1) smoking rooms be ventilated to the outside, 2) the concentration of airborne dust is 0.15 m/m3 or less, 3) the concentration of carbon monoxide is 10 ppm or less, and 4) the wind speed of air flowing toward the smoking rooms at the boundary between non-smoking areas and smoking rooms is 0.2 m/s or greater.

The Health Promotion Act also addresses many places that are workplaces for some people (including public places, offices and government buildings) and asks managers of these places to “try to take whatever steps are necessary to prevent passive smoking exposure.”

At the national level, the language of the laws are not obligatory in nature and do not require mangers or employers to ban or restrict smoking in workplaces, but rather “to endeavor” or “to try” to take measures “as necessary.” Therefore, the regulatory status “Smoking Not Restricted” is given. This regulatory status is also given because there are no penalties associated with failure to comply with the provisions of the national law.

To align with FCTC Art. 8 and the FCTC Art. 8 Guidelines, the national law should require all parts of all indoor public places and workplaces to be 100% smoke free.

Article 25 of the Health Promotion Act asks managers of certain enumerated public places, and “other facilities used by numerous people” to “try to take whatever steps are necessary to prevent passive smoking exposure.” HSB Notification 0025 implements Article 25 and notifies prefectural governors that “other facilities” includes public transport, lodging and additional enumerated public places. This notification clarifies that “all public spaces used by a large number of people should be entirely non-smoking.” However, it stops short of requiring all public places to be entirely non-smoking and permits “appropriate passive smoking prevention measures” in places “where it is difficult to ban smoking entirely”; thereby allowing designated smoking areas or no action at all.

Article 71 of the Industrial Safety and Health Law (Act No. 57 of 1972), which may apply to certain indoor public places that are also workplaces, mandates employers to “endeavor to create a comfortable working environment.” Ministry of Labour, Health and Welfare Notification No. 59 implements Article 71 and calls on employers to take “measures, taken as necessary, against smoking, such as designating smoking areas within the workplace, etc.” The 2003 Workplace Guidelines provide standards for air quality, ventilation and reverse airflow for designated smoking rooms, if established.

At the national level, the language of the laws are not obligatory in nature and do not outright require mangers or employers to ban or restrict smoking in public places, but rather “to endeavor” or “to try” to take measures “as necessary.” Therefore, the regulatory status “Smoking Not Restricted” is given. This regulatory status is also given because there are no penalties associated with failure to comply with the provisions of the national law.

To align with FCTC Art. 8 and the FCTC Art. 8 Guidelines, the national law should require all parts of all indoor public places and workplaces to be 100% smoke free.

Article 25 of the Health Promotion Act asks managers of certain enumerated public places, and “other facilities used by numerous people” to “try to take whatever steps are necessary to prevent passive smoking exposure.” HSB Notification 0025 implements Article 25 and notifies prefectural governors that “other facilities” includes “railroad cars, buses, taxis, passenger planes, passenger boats, etc.” This notification clarifies that “all public spaces used by a large number of people should be entirely non-smoking.” However, it stops short of requiring such public places, including public transport, to be entirely non-smoking and permits “appropriate passive smoking prevention measures” in places “where it is difficult to ban smoking entirely”; thereby allowing designated smoking areas or no action at all.

At the national level, the language of the law is not obligatory in nature and does not outright require a ban or restrictions on smoking in public transport, but rather “to try” to take measures “as necessary.” Therefore, the regulatory status “Smoking Not Restricted” is given. This regulatory status is also given because there are no penalties associated with failure to comply with the provisions of the national law.

To align with FCTC Art. 8 and the FCTC Art. 8 Guidelines, the national law should require all public transport to be 100% smoke free.

Article 25 of the Health Promotion Act asks managers of certain enumerated public places, including “government buildings,” to “try to take whatever steps are necessary to prevent passive smoking exposure.” HSB Notification 0025 advises prefectural governors on implementation of Article 25. This notification clarifies that “it is desirable that, at the very least, government administration offices and medical institutions be completely smoke-free.” However, it stops short of requiring government buildings to be entirely non-smoking and permits “appropriate passive smoking prevention measures” in places “where it is difficult to ban smoking entirely”; thereby allowing designated smoking areas or no action at all.

In addition, Article 71 of the Industrial Safety and Health Law, which may apply to government buildings as workplaces, mandates employers to “endeavor to create a comfortable working environment.” Ministry of Labour, Health and Welfare Notification No. 59 implements Article 71 and calls on employers to take “measures, taken as necessary, against smoking, such as designating smoking areas within the workplace, etc.” The 2003 Workplace Guidelines provide standards for air quality, ventilation and reverse airflow for designated smoking rooms, if established.

At the national level, the language of the laws are not obligatory in nature and do not outright require a ban or restrictions on smoking in government buildings, but rather “to try to take whatever steps are necessary” and “to endeavor” to take measures “as necessary.” Therefore, the regulatory status “Smoking Not Restricted” is given. This regulatory status is also given because there are no penalties associated with failure to comply with the provisions of the national law.

To align with FCTC Art. 8 and the FCTC Art. 8 Guidelines, the national law should require all government buildings to be 100% smoke free.

Article 71 of the Industrial Safety and Health Act mandates employers to “endeavor to create a comfortable working environment.” Ministry of Labour, Health and Welfare Notification No. 59 implements Article 71 and asks employers to take “measures . . . against smoking, such as designating smoking areas within the workplace, etc.” The 2003 Workplace Guidelines specify: “To the extent possible, smoking rooms shall be installed; if difficulties arise in the installation of smoking rooms, a smoking corner shall be established.” The 2003 Workplace Guidelines provide standards for smoking rooms, if established, as follows: 1) smoking rooms be ventilated to the outside, 2) the concentration of airborne dust is 0.15 m/m3 or less, 3) the concentration of carbon monoxide is 10 ppm or less, and 4) the wind speed of air flowing toward the smoking rooms at the boundary between non-smoking areas and smoking rooms is 0.2 m/s or greater.

The Health Promotion Act also addresses many places that are workplaces for some people, including offices, and asks managers of these places to “try to take whatever steps are necessary to prevent passive smoking exposure.”

At the national level, the language of the laws are not obligatory in nature and do not require mangers or employers to ban or restrict smoking in workplaces, but rather “to endeavor” or “to try” to take measures “as necessary.” Therefore, the regulatory status “Smoking Not Restricted” is given. This regulatory status is also given because there are no penalties associated with failure to comply with the provisions of the national law.

To align with FCTC Art. 8 and the FCTC Art. 8 Guidelines, the national law should require all parts of all indoor workplaces, including private offices, to be 100% smoke free.

Article 25 of the Health Promotion Act asks managers of certain enumerated public places, including “hospitals,” to “try to take whatever steps are necessary to prevent passive smoking exposure.” HSB Notification 0025 advises prefectural governors on implementation of Article 25. This notification clarifies that “it is desirable that, at the very least, government administration offices and medical institutions be completely smoke-free.” However, it stops short of requiring hospitals to be entirely non-smoking and permits “appropriate passive smoking prevention measures” in places “where it is difficult to ban smoking entirely”; thereby allowing designated smoking areas or no action at all.

At the national level, the language of the law is not obligatory in nature and does not outright require a ban or restrictions on smoking in hospitals, but rather “to try to take whatever steps are necessary.” Therefore, the regulatory status “Smoking Not Restricted” is given. This regulatory status is also given because there are no penalties associated with failure to comply with the provisions of the national law.

To align with FCTC Art. 8 and the FCTC Art. 8 Guidelines, the national law should require all hospitals to be 100% smoke free.

Article 25 of the Health Promotion Act asks managers of certain enumerated public places, including “hospitals,” to “try to take whatever steps are necessary to prevent passive smoking exposure.” HSB Notification 0025 advises prefectural governors on implementation of Article 25. This notification clarifies that “it is desirable that, at the very least, government administration offices and medical institutions be completely smoke-free.” “Medical institutions” is interpreted as covering residential healthcare facilities. However, the notification stops short of requiring medical institutions, including public areas of residential healthcare facilities, to be entirely non-smoking and permits “appropriate passive smoking prevention measures” in places “where it is difficult to ban smoking entirely”; thereby allowing designated smoking areas or no action at all.

At the national level, the language of the law is not obligatory in nature and does not outright require a ban or restrictions on smoking in residential healthcare facilities, but rather “to try to take whatever steps are necessary.” Therefore, the regulatory status “Smoking Not Restricted” is given. This regulatory status is also given because there are no penalties associated with failure to comply with the provisions of the national law.

To align with FCTC Art. 8 and the FCTC Art. 8 Guidelines, the national law should require all public areas of residential healthcare facilities to be 100% smoke free.

Article 25 of the Health Promotion Act asks managers of certain enumerated public places, including “hospitals,” to “try to take whatever steps are necessary to prevent passive smoking exposure.” HSB Notification 0025 advises prefectural governors on implementation of Article 25. This notification clarifies that “it is desirable that, at the very least, government administration offices and medical institutions be completely smoke-free.” “Medical institutions” is interpreted as covering non-residential healthcare facilities. However, the notification stops short of requiring medical institutions, including non-residential healthcare facilities, to be entirely non-smoking and permits “appropriate passive smoking prevention measures” in places “where it is difficult to ban smoking entirely”; thereby allowing designated smoking areas or no action at all.

At the national level, the language of the law is not obligatory in nature and does not outright require a ban or restrictions on smoking in non-residential healthcare facilities, but rather “to try to take whatever steps are necessary” and “to endeavor” to take measures “as necessary.” Therefore, the regulatory status “Smoking Not Restricted” is given. This regulatory status is also given because there are no penalties associated with failure to comply with the provisions of the national law.

To align with FCTC Art. 8 and the FCTC Art. 8 Guidelines, the national law should require all areas of non-residential healthcare facilities to be 100% smoke free.

Article 25 of the Health Promotion Act asks managers of certain enumerated public places, including “schools,” to “try to take whatever steps are necessary to prevent passive smoking exposure.” HSB Notification 0025 advises prefectural governors on implementation of Article 25. This notification clarifies that “it is especially necessary to consider passive smoking prevention measures in public spaces that may be used by children, even if those spaces are outdoors.” However, the notification stops short of requiring childcare facilities and preschools to be entirely non-smoking and permits “appropriate passive smoking prevention measures” in places “where it is difficult to ban smoking entirely”; thereby allowing designated smoking areas or no action at all.

At the national level, the language of the law is not obligatory in nature and does not outright require a ban or restrictions on smoking in childcare facilities and preschools, but rather “to try to take whatever steps are necessary.” Therefore, the regulatory status “Smoking Not Restricted” is given. This regulatory status is also given because there are no penalties associated with failure to comply with the provisions of the national law.

To align with FCTC Art. 8 and the FCTC Art. 8 Guidelines, the national law should require all areas of childcare facilities and preschools to be 100% smoke free.

Article 25 of the Health Promotion Act asks managers of certain enumerated public places, including “schools,” to “try to take whatever steps are necessary to prevent passive smoking exposure.” HSB Notification 0025 advises prefectural governors on implementation of Article 25. This notification clarifies that “it is especially necessary to consider passive smoking prevention measures in public spaces that may be used by children, even if those spaces are outdoors.” However, the notification stops short of requiring primary and secondary schools to be entirely non-smoking and permits “appropriate passive smoking prevention measures” in places “where it is difficult to ban smoking entirely”; thereby allowing designated smoking areas or no action at all.

At the national level, the language of the laws do not outright require a ban or restrictions on smoking in primary and secondary schools, but rather “to try to take whatever steps are necessary." Therefore, the regulatory status “Smoking Not Restricted” is given. This regulatory status is also given because there are no penalties associated with failure to comply with the provisions of the national law.

To align with FCTC Art. 8 and the FCTC Art. 8 Guidelines, the national law should require all areas of primary and secondary schools to be 100% smoke free.

Article 25 of the Health Promotion Act asks managers of certain enumerated public places, including “schools” and “other facilities used by numerous people,” to “try to take whatever steps are necessary to prevent passive smoking exposure.” HSB Notification 0025 advises prefectural governors on implementation of Article 25. This notification clarifies that “all public spaces used by a large number of people should be entirely non-smoking.” This provision is interpreted as applying to universities and vocational facilities. However, the notification stops short of requiring public spaces, including universities and vocational facilities, to be entirely non-smoking and permits “appropriate passive smoking prevention measures” in places “where it is difficult to ban smoking entirely”; thereby allowing designated smoking areas or no action at all.

At the national level, the language of the laws are not obligatory in nature and do not outright require a ban or restrictions on smoking in universities and vocational facilities, but rather “to try to take whatever steps are necessary.” Therefore, the regulatory status “Smoking Not Restricted” is given. This regulatory status is also given because there are no penalties associated with failure to comply with the provisions of the national law.

To align with FCTC Art. 8 and the FCTC Art. 8 Guidelines, the national law should require all areas of universities to be 100% smoke free.

Article 25 of the Health Promotion Act asks managers of certain enumerated public places, including “department stores” and “other facilities used by numerous people,” to “try to take whatever steps are necessary to prevent passive smoking exposure.” HSB Notification 0025 advises prefectural governors on implementation of Article 25. This notification clarifies that “other facilities” includes all “shops.” However, the notification stops short of requiring shops to be entirely non-smoking and permits “appropriate passive smoking prevention measures” in places “where it is difficult to ban smoking entirely”; thereby allowing designated smoking areas or no action at all.

At the national level, the language of the laws are not obligatory in nature and do not outright require a ban or restrictions on smoking in shops, but rather “to try to take whatever steps are necessary." Therefore, the regulatory status “Smoking Not Restricted” is given. This regulatory status is also given because there are no penalties associated with failure to comply with the provisions of the national law.

To align with FCTC Art. 8 and the FCTC Art. 8 Guidelines, the national law should require all areas of shops to be 100% smoke free.

Article 25 of the Health Promotion Act asks managers of certain enumerated public places, including “theatres, public assembly halls, gallery spaces” and “other facilities used by numerous people,” to “try to take whatever steps are necessary to prevent passive smoking exposure.” HSB Notification 0025 advises prefectural governors on implementation of Article 25. This notification clarifies that “other facilities” includes all “museums” and “entertainment facilities.” Thus, many cultural facilities are covered by the law and notification. However, the notification stops short of requiring cultural facilities to be entirely non-smoking and permits “appropriate passive smoking prevention measures” in places “where it is difficult to ban smoking entirely”; thereby allowing designated smoking areas or no action at all.

At the national level, the language of the laws is not obligatory in nature and do not outright require a ban or restrictions on smoking in cultural facilities, but rather “to try to take whatever steps are necessary.” Therefore, the regulatory status “Smoking Not Restricted” is given. This regulatory status is also given because there are no penalties associated with failure to comply with the provisions of the national law.

To align with FCTC Art. 8 and the FCTC Art. 8 Guidelines, the national law should require all areas of cultural facilities to be 100% smoke free.

Article 25 of the Health Promotion Act asks managers of certain enumerated public places, including “public assembly halls” and “other facilities used by numerous people,” to “try to take whatever steps are necessary to prevent passive smoking exposure.” HSB Notification 0025 advises prefectural governors on implementation of Article 25. This notification clarifies that “other facilities” includes all “entertainment facilities” and “outdoor stadiums.” The broad categories in the law and notification are interpreted as including “indoor stadiums and arenas” (especially in light of the inclusion of outdoor stadiums). However, the notification stops short of requiring indoor stadiums and arenas to be entirely non-smoking and permits “appropriate passive smoking prevention measures” in places “where it is difficult to ban smoking entirely”; thereby allowing designated smoking areas or no action at all.

At the national level, the language of the laws is not obligatory in nature and do not outright require a ban or restrictions on smoking in indoor stadiums and arenas, but rather “to try to take whatever steps are necessary.” Therefore, the regulatory status “Smoking Not Restricted” is given. This regulatory status is also given because there are no penalties associated with failure to comply with the provisions of the national law.

To align with FCTC Art. 8 and the FCTC Art. 8 Guidelines, the national law should require all areas of indoor stadiums and arenas to be 100% smoke free.

Article 25 of the Health Promotion Act asks managers of certain enumerated public places, including “restaurants,” to “try to take whatever steps are necessary to prevent passive smoking exposure.” HSB Notification 0025 advises prefectural governors on implementation of Article 25. This notification clarifies that “as a general rule public spaces that are used by a large number of people should be entirely non-smoking.” However, the notification stops short of requiring public places, including restaurants, to be entirely non-smoking and permits “appropriate passive smoking prevention measures” in places “where it is difficult to ban smoking entirely”; thereby allowing designated smoking areas or no action at all.

At the national level, the language of the laws is not obligatory in nature and do not outright require a ban or restrictions on smoking in restaurants, but rather “to try to take whatever steps are necessary.” Therefore, the regulatory status “Smoking Not Restricted” is given. This regulatory status is also given because there are no penalties associated with failure to comply with the provisions of the national law.

To align with FCTC Art. 8 and the FCTC Art. 8 Guidelines, the national law should require all areas of restaurants to be 100% smoke free.

Article 25 of the Health Promotion Act asks managers of certain enumerated public places, including “bars” and ““other facilities used by numerous people,” to “try to take whatever steps are necessary to prevent passive smoking exposure.” HSB Notification 0025 advises prefectural governors on implementation of Article 25. This notification clarifies that “other facilities” includes “entertainment facilities.” The law and notification are interpreted as covering all bars and nightclubs. However, the notification stops short of requiring bars and nightclubs to be entirely non-smoking and permits “appropriate passive smoking prevention measures” in places “where it is difficult to ban smoking entirely”; thereby allowing designated smoking areas or no action at all.

At the national level, the language of the laws do not outright require a ban or restrictions on smoking in bars and nightclubs, but rather “to try to take whatever steps are necessary.” Therefore, the regulatory status “Smoking Not Restricted” is given. This regulatory status is also given because there are no penalties associated with failure to comply with the provisions of the national law.

To align with FCTC Art. 8 and the FCTC Art. 8 Guidelines, the national law should require all areas of bars and nightclubs to be 100% smoke free.

Casinos are currently illegal in Japan.

Article 25 of the Health Promotion Act asks managers of certain enumerated public places and “facilities used by numerous people” to “try to take whatever steps are necessary to prevent passive smoking exposure.” HSB Notification 0025 advises prefectural governors on implementation of Article 25. This notification clarifies that “other facilities” includes “lodging facilities such as hotels and inns.” However, the notification stops short of requiring public areas of lodging facilities to be entirely non-smoking and permits “appropriate passive smoking prevention measures” in places “where it is difficult to ban smoking entirely”; thereby allowing designated smoking areas or no action at all.

At the national level, the language of the laws do not outright require a ban or restrictions on smoking in public areas of hotels and other lodging facilities, but rather “to try to take whatever steps are necessary.” Therefore, the regulatory status “Smoking Not Restricted” is given. This regulatory status is also given because there are no penalties associated with failure to comply with the provisions of the national law.

To align with FCTC Art. 8 and the FCTC Art. 8 Guidelines, the national law should require all areas of hotels and lodging facilities to be 100% smoke free.

Article 25 of the Health Promotion Act asks managers of certain enumerated public places and “facilities used by numerous people” to “try to take whatever steps are necessary to prevent passive smoking exposure.” HSB Notification 0025 advises prefectural governors on implementation of Article 25. This notification clarifies that “other facilities” includes “lodging facilities such as hotels and inns.” However, the notification stops short of requiring guest rooms in lodging facilities to be entirely non-smoking and permits “appropriate passive smoking prevention measures” in places “where it is difficult to ban smoking entirely”; thereby allowing designated smoking guest rooms or no action at all.

At the national level, the language of the law is not obligatory in nature and does not outright require a ban or restrictions on smoking in guestrooms of hotels and other lodging facilities, but rather “to try to take whatever steps are necessary.” Therefore, the regulatory status “Smoking Not Restricted” is given. This regulatory status is also given because there are no penalties associated with failure to comply with the provisions of the national law.

To align with FCTC Art. 8 and the FCTC Art. 8 Guidelines, the national law should require all areas of hotels and lodging facilities to be 100% smoke free.

As of April 1, 2013, smoking is prohibited in all areas of all prison and detention facilities throughout Japan by the National Police Agency. This agency policy fulfills Article 25 of the Health Promotion Act, which asks managers of certain enumerated public places, including “government buildings” to “try to take whatever steps are necessary to prevent passive smoking exposure.”

The National Police Agency policy aligns with FCTC Art. 8 and the FCTC Art. 8 Guidelines with respect to public areas of prisons and detention facilities.

Article 25 of the Health Promotion Act asks managers of certain enumerated public places and “other facilities used by numerous people” to “try to take whatever steps are necessary to prevent passive smoking exposure.” HSB Notification 0025 implements Article 25 and notifies prefectural governors that “other facilities” includes “railroad cars, buses, taxis, passenger planes, passenger boats, etc.” This notification clarifies that “all public spaces used by a large number of people should be entirely non-smoking.” However, it stops short of requiring public transport, including trains, buses and other shared ground transportation, to be entirely non-smoking and permits “appropriate passive smoking prevention measures” in places “where it is difficult to ban smoking entirely”; thereby allowing designated smoking railcars or areas or no action.

At the national level, the language of the law is not obligatory and does not outright require a ban or restrictions on smoking in trains, buses and other shared ground transportation, but rather “to try” to take measures “as necessary.” Therefore, the regulatory status “Smoking Not Restricted” is given. This regulatory status is also given because there are no penalties associated with failure to comply with the provisions of the national law.

To align with FCTC Art. 8 and the FCTC Art. 8 Guidelines, the national law should require all public transport to be 100% smoke free.

Article 25 of the Health Promotion Act asks managers of certain enumerated public places and “other facilities used by numerous people” to “try to take whatever steps are necessary to prevent passive smoking exposure.” HSB Notification 0025 implements Article 25 and notifies prefectural governors that “other facilities” includes “railroad cars, buses, taxis, passenger planes, passenger boats, etc.” This notification clarifies that “all public spaces used by a large number of people should be entirely non-smoking.” However, it stops short of requiring public transport, including taxis, to be entirely non-smoking and permits “appropriate passive smoking prevention measures” in places “where it is difficult to ban smoking entirely”; thereby allowing designated smoking areas or no action.

At the national level, the language of the law is not obligatory and does not outright require a ban or restrictions on smoking in taxis, but rather “to try” to take measures “as necessary.” Therefore, the regulatory status “Smoking Not Restricted” is given. This regulatory status is also given because there are no penalties associated with failure to comply with the provisions of the national law.

To align with FCTC Art. 8 and the FCTC Art. 8 Guidelines, the national law should require all taxis to be 100% smoke free.

Article 25 of the Health Promotion Act asks managers of certain enumerated public places and “other facilities used by numerous people” to “try to take whatever steps are necessary to prevent passive smoking exposure.” HSB Notification 0025 implements Article 25 and notifies prefectural governors that “other facilities” includes “railroad cars, buses, taxis, passenger planes, passenger boats, etc.” This notification clarifies that “all public spaces used by a large number of people should be entirely non-smoking.” However, it stops short of requiring all public transport, including planes, to be entirely non-smoking and permits “appropriate passive smoking prevention measures” in places “where it is difficult to ban smoking entirely”; thereby allowing designated smoking areas or no action.

At the national level, the language of the law is not obligatory and does not outright require a ban or restrictions on smoking in public transport, including planes, but rather “to try” to take measures “as necessary.” Therefore, the regulatory status “Smoking Not Restricted” is given. This regulatory status is also given because there are no penalties associated with failure to comply with the provisions of the national law.

To align with FCTC Art. 8 and the FCTC Art. 8 Guidelines, the national law should require all commercial aircraft to be 100% smoke free.

Article 25 of the Health Promotion Act asks managers of certain enumerated public places and “other facilities used by numerous people” to “try to take whatever steps are necessary to prevent passive smoking exposure.” HSB Notification 0025 implements Article 25 and notifies prefectural governors that “other facilities” includes “railroad cars, buses, taxis, passenger planes, passenger boats, etc.” This notification clarifies that “all public spaces used by a large number of people should be entirely non-smoking.” However, it stops short of requiring all public transport, including passenger boats, to be entirely non-smoking and permits “appropriate passive smoking prevention measures” in places “where it is difficult to ban smoking entirely”; thereby allowing designated smoking areas or no action.

At the national level, the language of the law does not outright require a ban or restrictions on smoking in public transport, including passenger boats, but rather “to try” to take measures “as necessary.” Therefore, the regulatory status “Smoking Not Restricted” is given. This regulatory status is also given because there are no penalties associated with failure to comply with the provisions of the national law.

To align with FCTC Art. 8 and the FCTC Art. 8 Guidelines, the national law should require all commercial watercraft to be 100% smoke free.

Article 25 of the Health Promotion Act asks managers of certain enumerated public places and “other facilities used by numerous people” to “try to take whatever steps are necessary to prevent passive smoking exposure.” HSB Notification 0025 implements Article 25 and notifies prefectural governors that “other facilities” includes “train stations, bus terminals, airport terminals, [and] boat terminals.” This notification clarifies that “all public spaces used by a large number of people should be entirely non-smoking.” However, it stops short of requiring such public places, including public transport facilities, to be entirely non-smoking and permits “appropriate passive smoking prevention measures” in places “where it is difficult to ban smoking entirely”; thereby allowing designated smoking areas or no action.

At the national level, the language of the laws is not obligatory and does not outright require mangers or employers to ban or restrict smoking in public places, but rather “to try” to take measures “as necessary.” Therefore, the regulatory status “Smoking Not Restricted” is given. This regulatory status is also given because there are no penalties associated with failure to comply with the provisions of the national law.

To align with FCTC Art. 8 and the FCTC Art. 8 Guidelines, the national law should require all public transport facilities to be 100% smoke free.