経済産業省は、工場を建設する目的で平成27年（1月～12月期）に1,000平方メートル以上の用地を取得した製造業、ガス業、熱供給業、電気業の事業者を対象に「工場立地動向調査」を実施し、結果を取りまとめました。

4月5日から9日まで、韓国のソウルにおいて、日中韓自由貿易協定(FTA)交渉の第10回交渉会合(局長/局次長会合)が開催されます。

経済産業省は、昨年10月に「活力あふれる『ビンテージ・ソサエティ』の実現に向けた取組に係る研究会」を立ち上げ、検討を重ね、今般報告書をとりまとめました。

交通事故の削減や渋滞緩和、環境負荷低減等の課題解決が期待される協調ITS（※）の実現普及に必要とされる地図データベースの整備や維持・更新のコスト削減に役立つ日本発の国際規格が制定されました。

平成28年3月4日に、東京電力からありました改正電気事業法に基づく会社分割に係る申請について、このたび申請のとおり認可しました。

令和8年度地方財政審議会（5月13日）議事要旨

林総務大臣閣議後記者会見の概要

令和8年度地方財政審議会（6月17日）議事要旨

第10回統計作成プロセス部会

情報通信審議会　情報通信政策部会　放送政策委員会（第2回）

■開催趣旨1989年3月29日、東京都江東区若洲で衝撃的な事件が発覚した。ドラム缶にコンクリート詰めにされた女性の遺体だった。被害者は埼玉県三郷市に住む17歳の女子高生。事件に関わったのは少年6人だった。実刑判決が下されたのは、最年長の18歳、17歳の2人、16歳の4人で、2人の16歳は少年院送致になった。この史上最悪の少年犯罪を起こした6人の出所後を追ったのが今年1月刊行の『償い』（文藝春秋）。現在、北海道放送（HBC）の報道部デスクを務める著者の山﨑裕侍氏は、テレビ朝日系..

　「疾風怒濤」。ある人 の生涯を簡単な言葉で語ってならないのは重々承知だが、中村哲の人生を辿る本書に、この言葉が浮かんだ。もう一つ言葉にするなら「敬天愛人」 か。天の広さを慈しみ名もなき人々を心から愛する中村哲には相応しい。　著者が哲へ捧げた崇敬と憧憬が、本書には泣けるほど詰まっている。長い年月をかけ、あまたの関係者に話を聞いて素晴らしい本書が誕生した。　中村哲の生い立ちを辿る前半。哲の祖父母、玉 井金五郎と妻マンの侠気は哲の叔父の火野葦平『花と龍』に描かれ何度も映画化された..

6月20日は、国連総会が2000年12月4日に設定した世界難民の日でした。2025年12月に、国連難民高等弁務官に選ばれたバルハム・サリフ氏は、この日を初めて＜ボス＞として迎えました。　もともと6月20日は、OAU（アフリカ統一機構、1963年5月成立）難民条約の発効を記念する＜アフリカ難民の日＞だったのです。　OAUは故カダフィ大佐によって、2002年7月、AU（アフリカ連合）へと発展解消されました。　日本には、UNHCRの活動を支える公式支援窓口と但し書きがついた＜UNHCR協会＞という別組織があります。

　　　　　　　　色とりどりのボードを掲げる憲法集会参加者たち＝撮影、古川英一　全国で護憲、改憲それぞれの立場で様々な取り組みが行われた憲法記念日の３日、東京・有明防災公園では改憲の動きに反対の市民団体が「つながろう 憲法生かして平和な世界を！２０２６憲法大集会」を、千代田区内では改憲を求める民間団体が「待ったなし、憲法改正」を掲げ「公開憲法フォーラム」をそれぞれ催した。憲法集会　憲法大集会には約５万人（主催者発表）と、憲法が直面する状況への危機感の拡がりをうかがわせる昨年（３..

This week, politicians in the UK pushed forward with plans to eviscerate privacy and free speech on the internet by announcing a ban on social media for users under 16 that is set to take effect in Spring 2027. 

The UK government continues to falsely characterize this policy as a necessary response to growing concerns about online harms for young people. In reality, much like the Online Safety Act, it will cause more harm than it will prevent. 

Users of all ages are burdened with proving their age before accessing content, with social media platforms such as Snapchat, TikTok, YouTube, Instagram, Facebook, and X included in the ban. There remains no reliable, privacy-preserving method of verifying the age of every internet user and methods vary from one platform to the next.

Young people will not simply be protected from being contacted by adults or endlessly scrolling—they’ll also lose access to educational videos on YouTube, local events on Facebook, and potentially cut off from distant friends and family. 

Public policy must be effective, proportionate and respectful of fundamental rights. Young people deserve better than a policy built on panic, and all internet users deserve a safe and free internet. A social media ban generates headlines, but it will not solve the problem. 

A Brief History of Age-Gating in the UK

Age restriction proposals in the UK date back to a decade ago, when the proposed Digital Economy Bill was put forth to (among other things) restrict young people from accessing pornographic websites. While the Digital Economy Act of 2017 passed without age-based restrictions, it laid the groundwork for later age verification measures.

Over the next few years, age checks for porn websites were announced then delayed several times. But it wasn’t until a consultation under the 2016-2019 May government and the 2020 publication of the Online Harms Whitepaper that age verification became a broader idea.

In 2023, the UK passed the controversial Online Safety Act, establishing powers that could weaken privacy protections and freedom of expression for internet users worldwide. In July 2025, the government implemented age assurance measures on sites hosting “harmful” content. 

And despite politicians affirming repeatedly that the Online Safety Act would solve all of the problems with online safety, this year they decided it in fact did not go far enough. American social psychologist and The Anxious Generation author Jonathan Haidt—who has called for age-related social media bans around the world, despite significant scientific doubt about his research—met with the UK Health Secretary in February to push for the ban.

In March, politicians introduced plans for a social media ban into the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill to “prevent children under the age of 16 from becoming or being users” of “all regulated user-to-user services,” to be implemented by “highly-effective age assurance measures”—effectively banning under-16s from social media. 

When this proposal came before the House of Commons, MPs defeated and proposed their own amendment: enabling the Secretary of State to introduce provisions “requiring providers of specified internet services” to prevent access by children, under age 18 rather than 16, to specified internet services or to specified features; and to restrict access by children to specified internet services which ministers provide. 

But the social media ban does not stop there. The provision also requires internet service providers to limit the time kids spend online, and has rules about who can contact them online. These extreme rules will take decisions about using technology away from families and put them in the hands of government regulators. 

The history of this proposal shows that the UK government has repeatedly returned to the same flawed idea: restricting access to online services by requiring age checks for everyone. But the fundamental problems have not changed. There is still no widely available way to verify age online without compromising privacy—but even if there were, broad restrictions on social media will inevitably limit access to lawful speech, and valuable online communities, and arts and culture.

This week, EFF joined Foxglove, Human Rights Watch, and 60 other organizations in writing to the UK’s Minister of State for Border Security and Asylum, Alex Norris, raising serious concern about the Home Office’s decision to deploy Facial Age Estimation (FAE) to assess asylum-seeking children from 2027. 

The letter points to four key concerns:

Discrimination 

As with most face estimation and recognition tools, there is ongoing bias in the deployment of these technologies. With FAE, many have highlighted its baked-in failures and discrimination, particularly in relation to women and people of color. Evidence shows that FAE is most accurate for estimating the ages of Eastern European men, but even then it consistently produces errors. The Home Office itself noted “that FAE performance can vary depending on ethnicity” and skin tone. 

Inaccuracy

The Home Office has admitted that FAE systems are imprecise for analyzing 16-to 18-year-olds, with even the “top systems” having an “error margin of around 2.5 years here.” This is exactly the age range for which the Home Office has chosen to deploy this technology. And this error margin will be widened yet further because children seeking asylum often suffer from trauma-induced aging. 

Lawfulness of Use of Children’s Data

Major concerns exist around the lawful basis on which the Home Office, or its chosen third-party FAE vendors, could have sought consent to collect and process photographs or data from asylum-seeking children to train this system. Further, there is no clarity on the images and/or data that this technology has been trained on. 

Lack of Necessary Disclosure 

The Home Office claims “extensive testing has already been carried out across diverse groups, including different ethnicities, genders and age ranges, indicating promising performance and accuracy.” But these purported “promising” results have not been published, nor have any Equality or Data Protection Impact Assessments. 

The letter continues by requesting clarification on several key questions regarding these concerns. EFF and partners have provided the UK government 21 days for a response, and we urge the Home Office to take on this uphill task in good faith and release the information.

You can read the letter in full here. 

三菱電機製MELSEC iQ-FシリーズのFX5-EIPおよびFX5-ENET/IPには、サービス運用妨害（DoS）状態が発生する可能性のある脆弱性が存在します。

CERT/CCから本件に関するアドバイザリが公表されました。