CCPR/C/JPN/CO/5 page 8 who exploit such trainees and interns, and consider replacing the current programmes with a new scheme that adequately protects the rights of trainees and interns and focuses on capacity-building rather than recruiting low-paid labour. 25. The Committee notes with concern that the 2006 Immigration Control and Refugee Recognition Act does not expressly prohibit the return of asylum-seekers to a country where there is a risk of torture, that the recognition rates for asylum-seekers remain low in relation to the number of applications filed, and that there are often substantial delays in the refugee recognition process during which applicants are not allowed to work and receive only limited social assistance. It is also concerned that the possibility of filing an objection with the Minister for Justice against a negative asylum decision does not constitute an independent review because the refugee examination counsellors advising the Minister upon review are not independently appointed and have no power to issue binding decisions. Lastly, it is concerned about reported cases of rejected asylum-seekers having been deported before they could submit an objection against the negative decision on their application to stay the execution of the deportation order (art. 7 and 13). The State party should consider amending the Immigration Control and Refugee Recognition Act, with a view to explicitly prohibiting the return of asylum-seekers to countries where there is a risk of torture or other ill-treatment, and ensure that all asylum-seekers have access to counsel, legal aid and an interpreter, as well as to adequate State-funded social assistance or employment during the entire length of proceedings. It should also establish an entirely independent appeal mechanism, including for applicants who are deemed to be “possible terrorists” by the Minister for Justice, and ensure that rejected applicants are not deported immediately after the conclusion of the administrative proceedings before they can submit an appeal against the negative asylum decision. 26. The Committee is concerned about unreasonable restrictions placed on freedom of expression and on the right to take part in the conduct of public affairs, such as the prohibition of door-to-door canvassing, as well as restrictions on the number and type of written materials that may be distributed during pre-election campaigns, under the Public Offices Election Law. It is also concerned about reports that political activists and public employees have been arrested and indicted under laws on trespassing or under the National Civil Service Law for distributing leaflets with content critical of the Government to private mailboxes (art. 19 and 25). The State party should repeal any unreasonable restrictions on freedom of expression and on the right to take part in the conduct of public affairs from its legislation to prevent the police, prosecutors and courts from unduly restricting political campaigning and other activities protected under articles 19 and 25 of the Covenant. 27. The Committee is concerned about the low age of sexual consent, which has been set at 13 years for boys and girls (art. 24). The State party should raise the age of sexual consent for boys and girls from its current level of 13 years, with a view to protecting the normal development of children and preventing child abuse.