Expert: Legal Flaws in Dissolution Order Case

According to Japanese expert on religious corporations’ law there are several serious legal flaws in the authorities’ request to Tokyo District Court to issue an order to dissolve a religious corporation that has committed no crimes

Tokyo, 3rd February 2025 – Published as an article in the Japanese newspaper Sekai Nippo. Republished with permission. Translated from Japanese. Original article. 

[Series] Request for Dissolution Order of the Family Federation – Suspicions of Fabricated Statements by the Ministry of Education

Interview with an expert: “Victim” Reports Directly Used as Evidence

Seishiro Sugihara, professor of the former Musashino Women’s University: Dissolution Request to Become a Major Issue

by the editorial department of Sekai Nippo

Part 3 of the article

See part 1, part 2

See also Flawed, Deceptive Evidence Gathering by State

See also Civil Case Ruling Shows Partiality of Judiciary

Interview (continued)

Q: What is your perspective on the dissolution order request for the Family Federation? How should the organization proceed in the future?

Ultimately, the current dissolution order process deviates from the original framework outlined in the Religious Corporations Act.

Specifically, regarding the Family Federation, it has not committed any criminal offenses. When former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe (安倍 晋三, 1954–2022) was assassinated, and the Unification Church issue came under scrutiny, then-Prime Minister Fumio Kishida (岸田 文雄) made an erroneous decision. Abe’s assassination should have been recognized as an act of terrorism, and the focus should have been on investigating the crime itself. However, when the suspect’s supposed grudge against the former Unification Church was sensationalized by the media, Kishida, in response to media pressure, expanded the criteria for dissolution to include civil cases as grounds for dissolution.

This is a prime example of politically unacceptable populism.

Article 81 of the Religious Corporations Act originally established dissolution proceedings with the concern that allowing administrative agencies to unilaterally dissolve religious organizations would be dangerous. Therefore, court approval was made a requirement. Under this provision, when an administrative body deems dissolution necessary, it must submit a request to the court, which then determines whether dissolution is justified before issuing a dissolution order. The process also includes a review by the Religious Affairs Council for further scrutiny.

As a result, dissolution proceedings are handled as a “non-contentious case” [See editor’s note 1 below] rather than a regular trial. This is because, in principle, a religious corporation should only be dissolved when it has committed criminal acts, undergone public trials, and received a final ruling confirming the grounds for dissolution. In such cases, the court’s role in a non-contentious case is merely to confirm the already-established fact of criminal conduct.

In the case of civil matters, if there are multiple final court rulings repeatedly determining certain acts as unlawful, and if the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT), which oversees religious corporations, has issued multiple correctional recommendations but civil disputes continue and further rulings continue to find unlawful acts, only in such cases should MEXT be able to submit a petition to the court for a dissolution order.

Only in such cases should the court handle the matter as a non-contentious case, conduct a non-public hearing, and issue a dissolution order if deemed appropriate.

However, in the case of the Family Federation, a compliance declaration was made in 2009, and since then, civil disputes have significantly decreased. Therefore, a dissolution request based on civil matters is, in effect, impossible.

That being said, if the Tokyo District Court were to issue a decision for dissolution, and a dissolution order is issued, it would be possible to appeal to the Tokyo High Court. However, rather than doing so, it would be possible to file an administrative lawsuit with the Tokyo District Court, arguing that MEXT’s request for a dissolution order – the administrative action itself – is unlawful. Under the Constitution, both citizens and private organizations have the right to file an administrative lawsuit against unlawful administrative actions, so this should be a viable option.

Furthermore, in such a lawsuit, the Family Federation could demand the disclosure of the documents submitted by MEXT to the Tokyo District Court as the grounds for the dissolution order request. Otherwise, under the Japanese Constitution, the Family Federation would be issued a dissolution order while being deprived of its right to a fair trial. This is clearly unconstitutional.

The Family Federation should actively engage in public relations efforts to widely convey to society its respect for family values and work towards fostering a true understanding of its nature. Additionally, it should appeal to the United Nations and other international organizations that the dissolution order constitutes a violation of the principle of separation of church and state. Furthermore, just as in the case of Soka Gakkai [See editor’s note 2 below], it should argue that religion, by its very nature, seeks the construction of an ideal state and society, and therefore, approaching politicians is a natural right of religious organizations.

See part 1, part 2 of the article

[Editor’s note 1: A non-contentious case refers to a legal matter where there is no dispute between parties. These cases typically involve administrative, procedural, or uncontested legal actions, such as probate (handling a deceased person’s estate), uncontested divorces, adoption, or registering a trademark. Since there are no opposing parties or legal conflicts, these cases usually proceed smoothly through the legal system without litigation.]

[Editor’s note 2: Soka Gakkai, a global lay Buddhist organization originating in Japan, aims to create an “ideal world” based on the principles of Nichiren Buddhism, which emphasizes individual empowerment, inner transformation, and societal harmony. Their vision is often framed as kosen-rufu, meaning the widespread propagation of Buddhist values to establish peace and happiness for all.

Soka Gakkai promotes peace, culture, and education through initiatives that focus on personal transformation (human revolution) – the belief that changing oneself positively impacts society; peace ativism – anti-nuclear campaigns, human rights advocacy, and interfaith dialogue; education – institutions like Soka University emphasize value creation and global citizenship; community engagement – social welfare programs, disaster relief, and environmental sustainability efforts.

To actualize these ideals in governance, Soka Gakkai founded the Komeito party in 1964 (now known as New Komeito or simply Komeito). The party’s purpose was to translate Buddhist-based humanistic values into public policy. While legally separate from Soka Gakkai, Komeito has long been backed by members of Soka Gakkai and focuses on peace-oriented diplomacy (e.g., supporting Japan’s pacifist constitution); social welfare policies (benefiting education, healthcare, and the elderly); grassroots democracy (reflecting the voice of ordinary citizens)

Since 1999, Komeito has been a coalition partner with the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), influencing policies while maintaining a centrist stance.

Despite its contributions, Soka Gakkai’s political role has been controversial, with critics accusing it of blurring the lines between religion and politics. Some also argue that Komeito’s alliance with the conservative LDP compromises its original pacifist ideals.

Soka Gakkai envisions an ideal world through personal empowerment, education, and political engagement. While its approach is rooted in Buddhist ethics, its political involvement remains a complex and debated issue.]

Featured image above: Japanese lawyer presenting a case with legal flaws in court. Illustration: Microsoft Designer Image Creator, 22nd February 2025 

Related to legal flaws in dissolution case: “Poorly Compiled Evidence Including Falsehoods”

Also related to legal flaws in dissolution case: Huge Scandal: “Ministry Is Falsifying Affidavits”

Also related to legal flaws in dissolution case: Japan’s New Laws to Curb New Religious Movements

Also related to legal flaws in dissolution case: New Law Designed to Bankrupt Family Federation

Also related to legal flaws in dissolution case: Terms from Consumer Law Used to Rob Faith

And also related to legal flaws in dissolution case: New Law Manufacturing “Victims”, Dividing Families

And also related to legal flaws in dissolution case: Maverick Minister Lets “3 Foxes in the Henhouse”

More, related to legal flaws in dissolution case: Journalist Reveals Ugly Leftwing Conspiracy

And more, related to legal flaws in dissolution case: Militant Lawyers Dictate Government Policy

And more, related to legal flaws in dissolution case: Courts Using Debunked Concepts Against Minority

Also related to legal flaws in dissolution case: Dissolution Case: Wild Claims, Illegal Actions

Also related to legal flaws in dissolution case: 2nd-Generation Members Protesting Persecution

Also related to legal flaws in dissolution case: Inhuman Government-Supported Mass Deprogramming

And also related to legal flaws in dissolution case: Bias: No Right to Respond for Religious Minority

More, related to legal flaws in dissolution case: Collusion to Rob Minority of Its Rights

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

Still more, related to legal flaws in dissolution case: Japan Criticized for Glaring Rights Violations

Even more, related to legal flaws in dissolution case: Two European Scholars Warning Japan

And yet more, related to legal flaws in dissolution case: Japan Censured at Religious Freedom Event

And still more, related to legal flaws in dissolution case: Lawyer Exposes Dirty Leftwing Plot

And even more, related to legal flaws in dissolution case: Inhuman Government-Supported Mass Deprogramming

And still more, related to legal flaws in dissolution case: Malicious One-Sided Government Source Selection

More, related to legal flaws in dissolution case: Government’s Foul Play Pointed Out

More, related to legal flaws in dissolution case: Kishida Has Opened Can of Worms