Dangerous Flaws in Dissolution Order Decried

Exposing “Reckless” Flaws

Large Japanese Monthly Magazine Publishes Searing Critique of the Tokyo District Court’s Dissolution Order Against Family Federation

See also Invented Harm, Lawfare, and Dissolution Order

See also Writers, Clergy Urge Rethink of Media Narrative

In the September 2025 issue of the Japanese monthly magazine Hanada – out already 25^th July – former prosecutor and attorney Nobuya Fukumoto delivers a searing critique of the Tokyo District Court’s decision to issue a dissolution order against the Family Federation for World Peace and Unification (formerly the Unification Church). In English the headline of their article reads: “The Former Unification Church – the Irregularities of the Dissolution Order”.

Speaking with legal scholar Seishiro Sugihara, professor at the former Musashino Women’s University, Fukumoto makes the case that the ruling is not only procedurally and legally unsound but signals a dangerous erosion of the principles of evidence-based justice and the rule of law in Japan.

At the heart of Fukumoto’s argument is a clear and forceful claim: the court’s decision rests not on verified facts or lawful findings, but on speculation, presumption, and selective interpretation of evidence. This, he argues, renders the judgment not merely flawed, but an affront to the basic tenets of legal fairness.

Speculation in Place of Proof

Fukumoto’s primary concern is that the court abandoned its obligation to base judgments on concrete evidence. Even if one accepts, as Sugihara does, that civil torts (unlawful acts according to civil law) could potentially justify a religious corporation’s dissolution under Japanese law, the question remains: Did the alleged conduct of the Family Federation meet those legal requirements? According to Fukumoto, the answer is clearly no.

He notes that in response to the allegations brought by Japan’s Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT), the Family Federation submitted detailed rebuttals and evidence – including contradictions in witness statements and documentation that allegedly exposed errors and fabrications in the Ministry’s report. These responses, he claims, were strong enough to cast significant doubt on the reliability of the Ministry’s case.

Yet, rather than engage with this counterevidence, the Tokyo District Court effectively side-stepped it, declining to rely on the very witness testimony it should have evaluated most rigorously. Fukumoto interprets this as a deliberate move to avoid dealing with the weaknesses in the state’s case: if the witnesses were discredited, the foundation for the allegations would collapse. By ignoring them, the court avoided this confrontation entirely.

The Dangerous Use of Settlements as “Proof”

What particularly shocks Fukumoto is the court’s reliance on settlement records – both in-court and out-of-court – as a surrogate for proof of harm or unlawful conduct. In his view, this is a gross distortion of legal logic. Settlements, by their nature, do not establish fault or liability; they are compromises made to avoid lengthy legal battles and often do not reflect admissions of wrongdoing by either party.

Nevertheless, the court treated the mere existence of settlements – and especially the monetary sums involved – as de facto evidence of harm. This, Fukumoto argues, is an extraordinary and dangerous leap of reasoning. If such a standard were applied broadly, any organization that settles disputes could be retroactively branded as engaging in unlawful behavior – a clear perversion of justice.

A “Death Sentence” Without a Trial

The culmination of this critique is Fukumoto’s argument that the dissolution order is tantamount to a “legal death sentence” for the religious organization. Such an extreme action, he argues, demands the highest standards of evidentiary scrutiny – far beyond what the court exhibited. Indeed, he notes that even in routine civil lawsuits, a judge cannot simply issue a ruling based on the plaintiff’s complaint alone. That the court would do so in a case with such profound implications is, in the words of Fukumoto, “absurd” and “reckless”.

Conclusion: A Threat to Legal Norms

Fukumoto’s analysis warns that if this ruling sets a precedent, the consequences could be dire – not just for religious organizations, but for any group facing politically or socially motivated scrutiny. His concern is not narrowly about the Family Federation, but about the erosion of legal standards and due process in Japan. Ultimately, he suggests, if speculation is allowed to stand in for evidence, the rule of law itself is imperiled.

See also Invented Harm, Lawfare, and Dissolution Order

See also Writers, Clergy Urge Rethink of Media Narrative

Text: Knut Holdhus, editor, written based on an English translation of the original Japanese text.

Featured image above: The front cover page of the September 2025 issue of Monthly Hanada, beside Attorney Nobuya Fukumoto (screenshot) and Professor Emeritus Seishiro Sugihara (Photo: Sekai Nippo).

Related to dangerous flaws in dissolution order: Lawfare: State Uses Legal System in War on Faith

Also related to dangerous flaws in dissolution order: “Lawyers Lying and Shaming Japan” for 50 Years

And also related to dangerous flaws in dissolution order: Japan Following the Way of China

And also related to dangerous flaws in dissolution order: Japan’s Dissolution Case Echoes China’s Playbook

More, related to dangerous flaws in dissolution order: Media/Legal Expert: Communism Behind Persecution

And more, related to dangerous flaws in dissolution order: Militant Lawyers Dictate Government Policy

More, related to dangerous flaws in dissolution order: Collusion to Rob Minority of Its Rights

Also denouncing the dissolution order: From the demonstration in Kasumigaseki in Tokyo 30th July 2025. Photo: FFWPU

And more, related to dangerous flaws in dissolution order: State and Media Creating “Today’s Non-Citizens”

And still more, related to dangerous flaws in dissolution order: 12 Religious Freedom NGOs Denouncing Japan

More, related to dangerous flaws in dissolution order: 4300 Abductions and Forcible Detentions

Yet more, related to dangerous flaws in dissolution order: Lawyers Manipulating, Coercing, Lying

Also related to dangerous flaws in dissolution order: Kishida Follows Anti-Family Federation Minister

Also related to dangerous flaws in dissolution order: Militant Lawyers Dictate Government Policy

Still more, related to dangerous flaws in dissolution order: Malicious One-Sided Government Source Selection

Yet more, related to dangerous flaws in dissolution order: Kishida’s Self-Defeating Populist Decisions

And still more, related to dangerous flaws in dissolution order: Japan Urged to Make U-Turn

And yet more, related to dangerous flaws in dissolution order: Dangerous Precedent to Crush Religions

And even more, related to dangerous flaws in dissolution order: Tendentious Reporting by New York Times

Still more, related to dangerous flaws in dissolution order: Japan Criticized for Glaring Rights Violations

Even more, related to dangerous flaws in dissolution order: Japan Following the Way of China

Yet more, related to dangerous flaws in dissolution order: Japanese Communists’ Final War

Still more, related to dangerous flaws in dissolution order: Political and Social Activism behind Oppression