日本警察官職務執行法雖僅由8 條法條構成，然而具有規定警察活動之基本法之地位。該法第 2 條第 1 項作為使警察官遇見可疑人士「得使其停止活動並詢問之」之法規依據。然而這般的見解，在實務運作上已被廣泛的採行。例如，回答警察的詰問、警察對於汽車駕駛人的攔停路檢，日本最高裁判所於部分判例中關於上述之爭議給予肯定的見解。而如此的解釋，盡可能的明確規範執法的範圍或使執法者於該規範範圍內得以依法執行。原則上，警察應該利用法院的見解，於實際個案中的急迫性或必要性，微妙地採取特別的作為，使其成為警察所採取的非強制性手段的無形力量。從而，藉由包括司法判決和法律修訂的有形作為，執法者更應該清楚的闡述所利用的一切手段。

The Law of the Enforcement of the Duty of Police Officers in Japan has only 8 articles forming the basis of administrative police power. Article 2-1 is most important or controversial that provides mainly how officers should act in stop-and-questioning. This provision, however, has been playing, in practice, a larger role than literal meaning, stop-and-questioning itself, and has been interpreted in practice and judicial precedents that it includes, for example, stop-and-frisk incident to police questioning, and stop-and-questioning to motorists. Japanese Supreme Court has held several considerable decisions about the above issues, and interpreted the provision to regulate or delineate as clearly as possible the range of work the officers can execute lawfully. The Court has been holding that the officers should use, in principle, the non-compulsory means, but they can use the subtle tangible force as exceptional measures according to the exigency or necessity of each case and circumstance. From now on, the tangible force which the officer can use should be clarified more clearly by using every means including judicial decision and revision of the law.