Japan Clearly Violating Its Rights Commitments

Expert on international human rights describes how Japan for a long time has violated international human rights commitments it has signed and ratified 

Patricia Duval, French attorney specialised in international human rights law, sent on 22^nd September 2024, a 29-page report titled “Japan: A Witch Hunt to Eradicate the Unification Church” to several UN offices. Bitter Winter, the leading international magazine on religious freedom and human rights published 3 days later, on 25^th September, an executive summary of the report. The day after, the magazine started publishing a 5-part series where Duval gives a more detailed description of the content.

Part 1 of comments on third article of Bitter Winter’s 5-part series 

See part 2, part 3

See part 1, part 2, part 3 of comments on fifth article of Bitter Winter’s 5-part series

See part 1, part 2 of comments on fourth article of Bitter Winter’s 5-part series

See part 1, part 2 of comments on second article of Bitter Winter’s 5-part series 

See part 1, part 2, part 3 of comments on first article of Bitter Winter’s 5-part series

Text: Knut Holdhus

Public welfare and social acceptability

International human rights expert Patricia Duval describes how Japan continues to impose restrictions on religious freedom that conflict with the international agreements it has committed to through its ratification of United Nations covenants. The United Nations Human Rights Committee has repeatedly reminded the Japanese government of the only permissible limitations on the expression of religion or belief, as outlined in Article 18.3 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). This article states that religious expression may only be restricted by law if it is necessary to protect public safety, order, health, morals, or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.

The Human Rights Committee has emphasized that “public welfare” and “social acceptability”” are not valid reasons to limit religious freedom under international law. In its General Comment No. 22, which provides guidance on interpreting Article 18, the Committee makes clear that this article protects a wide range of beliefs, including theistic, non-theistic, and atheistic views. Furthermore, the right not to follow any religion or belief is also safeguarded. The Committee stresses that Article 18 should be interpreted broadly, applying not just to traditional religions, but also to new or minority religious groups that may face hostility from the majority.

The fact that certain religious beliefs or practices might be deemed “socially unacceptable” cannot be used by Japan as a legitimate basis for attempting to eradicate religious movements such as the Family Federation. This is highlighted by the UN’s position that discrimination against any religion or belief, including those that are new or represent minority groups, is unacceptable.

Duval points out that in its bid to dissolve the Family Federation, Japan’s Ministry of Education (MEXT) has argued that the members in order to make individuals donate, allegedly impaired their judgment and disrupted the peaceful lives of their families. However, this argument is irrelevant under international human rights law, which does not take into account the potential disruption of family life caused by a person’s conversion to a new religious movement. Such a disruption cannot be used as a justification for curtailing religious freedom.

Similarly, the concept of “public welfare”, which is sometimes invoked to justify restrictions on religious expression in Japan, is not among the permissible grounds for limitation under Article 18.3 of the ICCPR. Japan, having signed and ratified the Covenant, is bound by these limitations. The use of public welfare as a reason to restrict religious freedom is, therefore, inconsistent with Japan’s international obligations.

In fact, Japan’s Religious Corporations Act, particularly Article 81(i), which allows for the dissolution of religious organizations in cases where they are deemed to cause significant harm to public welfare, should have been repealed long ago. This recommendation has been made repeatedly by the UN to the Japanese government, but it has not yet been acted upon. Japan’s continued reliance on “public welfare” as a criterion for restricting religious freedom undermines its commitment to the international human rights standards it has agreed to uphold.

Text: Knut Holdhus

Featured image above:

See part 1, part 2, part 3 of comments on fifth article of Bitter Winter’s 5-part series

See part 1, part 2 of comments on fourth article of Bitter Winter’s 5-part series

See part 2, part 3 of comments on third article of Bitter Winter’s 5-part series 

See part 1, part 2 of comments on second article of Bitter Winter’s 5-part series 

See part 1, part 2, part 3 of comments on first article of Bitter Winter’s 5-part series 

More about violating rights commitments: Japan’s Non-Compliance with UNHRC Suggestions

And more about violating rights commitments: Harsh Reality of 4300 Forcibly Deprogrammed

And yet more about violating rights commitments: Lawyer Exposes Dirty Leftwing Plot

Yet more about violating rights commitments: 12 Years of Forcible Detention and Awful Abuse

Still more about violating rights commitments: Inhuman Government-Supported Mass Deprogramming

Even more about violating rights commitments: Collusion to Rob Minority of Its Rights

And yet more about violating rights commitments: Malicious One-Sided Government Source Selection

And still more about violating rights commitments: Government’s Foul Play Pointed Out

And even more about violating rights commitments: Lawyers Using Witnesses under Duress

And more about violating rights commitments: Parents Pay for Activism of Pastors and Lawyers

More about violating rights commitments: Vicious Smear Tactic Used to Hide Criminal Acts

More about violating rights commitments: Lawyers Exploiting Fear of the Unknown

More about violating rights commitments: Sinister Plot of Hostile Lawyers Exposed

And more, related to violating rights commitments: Leaders from 18 Faiths Send Protest to Regime

Yet more, related to violating rights commitments: UN Body Watching: Japan Triggering Hate Crimes

Still more, related to violating rights commitments: Conference and Demo Protesting Dissolution

Even more, related to violating rights commitments: Steep Battle to Counter Hostile Propaganda

Also related to violating rights commitments: Media Helping Terrorist Reach His Goal

More, related to violating rights commitments: Kishida Administration Giving in to Terrorism

And more, related to violating rights commitments: Kishida Has Opened Can of Worms

And even more, related to violating rights commitments: Conference on Religious Freedom Violations

Still more, related to violating rights commitments: Japan: Threat to Religious Freedom

Even more, related to violating rights commitments: Call to End Witch Hunt