Preserving Religious Activity After Dissolution

Seeking continuity, Japanese Unificationists pursue reorganization under new structures to safeguard constitutionally protected religious activity after court-ordered dissolution

The South Korean weekly current affairs magazine Sisa Journal (시사저널) published on 17^th May 2026 a report titled “‘Dissolution Ordered’ – Unificationism in Japan Attempts Revival Under a New Name”. The article by reporter Kim Hyeon-ji (김현지) describes how the Japanese branch of the Family Federation for World Peace and Unification – in Korea often simply called Unificationism (통일교) – faces one of the most serious crises in its history. On 4^th March, the Tokyo High Court ruled that the religious organization should be dissolved, affirming an earlier lower-court decision. Under Japanese law governing religious corporations, liquidation procedures begin immediately after such a second-instance ruling, even while appeals continue.

See also Japanese Court Order Fulfilling Terrorist’s Wish

See also: Japan: Abusive State to Shape Children’s Beliefs

See also Supreme Court Justice with Hostile Views

See also Was the Appointment of Hostile Judge Deliberate?

The Sisa Journal reports that the dissolution process moved very quickly. Liquidators reportedly arrived at churches across Japan within hours of the ruling. Clergy and staff were allegedly forced to vacate buildings with little time to prepare. Employment contracts for many workers were later scheduled for termination as part of the winding-down process.

However, according to the Sisa Journal report, the religious organization did not simply accept the end of its activities in Japan. Instead, leaders of the dissolved organization appear to have begun exploring ways to preserve operations through other legal structures. Reporter Kim writes that two major strategies emerged almost immediately after the court ruling. First, an existing nonreligious foundation connected to the Family Federation changed its registered objectives to include religious activities “involving ceremonies and education”. Second, former senior officials reportedly began preparing an entirely new organization under a different name.

These moves are controversial because critics argue they undermine the purpose of the court’s dissolution order. Supporters of the relatively large minority faith, however, argue that the organization is defending religious freedom and attempting to continue lawful activities despite what they see as unfair government intervention.

Changes to an Existing Foundation

One of the clearest signs that the organization intended to continue operating came only days after the Tokyo High Court decision on 4^th March.

According to the Sisa Journal article, an affiliated entity called the Hyojeong Education & Culture Foundation had originally been established in Tokyo in 2018. At the time, it was registered as a general incorporated foundation with nonreligious purposes such as scholarship programs, youth education, and cultural development activities. On paper, it functioned as an educational and cultural organization rather than a religious corporation.

That changed shortly after the court ruling against the Family Federation. On 7^th March, just three days after the dissolution order, the foundation amended its registered business purposes. The revised registration added language allowing the association to conduct activities involving religion, ceremonies, and religious education. This was not a minor administrative adjustment. Some viewed it as an attempt to create a legal vehicle through which the religious body could continue operating even if the original religious corporation was dismantled.

The timing attracted particular attention. The amendment occurred immediately after the court ruling and while liquidation procedures were beginning nationwide. To observers, it appeared that the leadership of the religious organization had already prepared contingency plans in anticipation of losing the case.

Another detail that fueled speculation was the appointment of a new representative director for the foundation. The position was given to Masaichi Hori (堀正一), a former president of the Japanese Family Federation. His involvement strongly suggested continuity between the dissolved organization and the newly modified foundation. The registration changes were formally completed on 13^th March.

Under Japanese law, general incorporated foundations are generally permitted to revise their objectives unless the changes directly violate laws or regulations. Officials from Japan’s Ministry of Justice declined to discuss the specific case publicly but acknowledged that such amendments are ordinarily accepted in principle.

The broader implication is significant. Even if the original religious corporation loses its legal status, affiliated entities may still be able to continue many practical activities associated with the movement. That could include educational events, ceremonies, community gatherings, and potentially the continued collection of donations from supporters.

Critics argue this amounts to a circumvention of the court ruling. They believe the dissolution was intended not only to eliminate the organization’s legal corporate status but also to stop the structures through which it carried out its operations. If essentially the same leadership, networks, and supporters continue functioning through a different corporate form, opponents argue the dissolution loses much of its practical effect.

Supporters of the religious minority see the issue differently. They argue that changing the foundation’s objectives is a lawful administrative step intended to protect believers’ freedom of religion and association. From this perspective, the state may dissolve a particular legal corporation, but it cannot prohibit individuals from organizing new groups or continuing religious practices under another structure.

Plans for a New Organization

Sisa Journal points out that at the same time that the foundation was being restructured, reports emerged that former Family Federation executives were considering the creation of an entirely new organization.

According to the weekly magazine, Japanese media first reported these plans in early April 2026. According to those reports, former leaders of the Family Federation intended to establish a new group specifically designed to continue religious activities after the dissolution of the original organization. Masaichi Hori (堀正一), the same former leader connected to the foundation changes, was reportedly expected to head the new entity as well.

The proposed name reportedly drew directly from the English abbreviation of the organization’s full international title: “Family Federation for World Peace and Unification”, commonly shortened to FFWPU.

The reported goal of the new organization was straightforward: preserve the religious movement’s operational continuity despite the legal destruction of the old corporation. Observers believe this would allow the faith community to maintain worship services, organizational structures, fundraising systems, and member networks under a different legal identity.

The issue quickly became politically controversial in Japan. Legislators questioned whether authorities should allow organizations closely connected to the dissolved religious corporation to continue operating under nearly identical leadership and branding. According to the Sisa Journal report, questions were reportedly raised in Japan’s House of Representatives about whether authorities would approve efforts to rename existing organizations or register new entities connected to the movement.

Japanese authorities, however, avoided giving detailed public answers. Officials reportedly declined to comment on specific applications or hypothetical future decisions.

The situation highlights a broader legal and philosophical question facing Japan. Dissolving a religious corporation does not automatically eliminate the religious beliefs, communities, or personal networks associated with it. Members remain free to organize unless specific criminal violations occur. As a result, even a major legal defeat may not permanently end the movement itself.

For opponents, this possibility is deeply frustrating because they believe the organization’s activity system and influence networks could simply reappear under a different name. For supporters, the attempt to reorganize represents resilience and the continuation of constitutionally protected religious activity.

What happens next will likely depend on Japan’s Supreme Court ruling, future regulatory decisions, and whether the reorganized movement can retain enough financial and organizational support to survive the many attacks largely orchestrated by campaigning enemies like the large Japanese Communist Party (JCP) and a large network of leftwing activist lawyers that has worked continuously for 40 years to eliminate a movement that has grown far bigger than what hostile activists feel comfortable with.

See also Japanese Court Order Fulfilling Terrorist’s Wish

See also: Japan: Abusive State to Shape Children’s Beliefs

See also Supreme Court Justice with Hostile Views

See also Was the Appointment of Hostile Judge Deliberate?

Text: Knut Holdhus, editor

Featured image above: Preserving religious activity after dissolution. Illustration: ChatGPT, 17th May 2026

Related to preserving religious activity: Lawfare: State Uses Legal System in War on Faith

More, related to preserving religious activity: Scholar Questions Secrecy in Dissolution Case

And more, related to preserving religious activity: Shocked Author: “Japan Ignores Basics of Justice”

Still more, related to preserving religious activity: Legal Inconsistencies A Blow to Democracy

Even more, related to preserving religious activity: Japan: Court Accused of Using Speculation

Also related to preserving religious activity: MEXT’s Legal Spin and “Dissolution at All Costs”

Also related to preserving religious activity: UN Report: Japan’s Lawfare Against Faith Minority

And also related to preserving religious activity: Protesting No Transparency in Closed-Door Trial

More, related to preserving religious activity: Dangerous Flaws in Dissolution Order Decried

Also related to preserving religious activity: “Lawyers Lying and Shaming Japan” for 50 Years

And also related to preserving religious activity: Japan Following the Way of China

And also related to preserving religious activity: Japan’s Dissolution Case Echoes China’s Playbook

More, related to preserving religious activity: Media/Legal Expert: Communism Behind Persecution

And more, related to preserving religious activity: Militant Lawyers Dictate Government Policy

More, related to preserving religious activity: Collusion to Rob Minority of Its Rights

And more, related to preserving religious activity: State and Media Creating “Today’s Non-Citizens”

Still more, related to preserving religious activity: Japan Copying China: State Seizure of Churches

And still more, related to preserving religious activity: 12 Religious Freedom NGOs Denouncing Japan

More, related to preserving religious activity: 4300 Abductions and Forcible Detentions

And more, related to preserving religious activity: Japan: Families Fear for Graves of Loved Ones

Yet more, related to preserving religious activity: Lawyers Manipulating, Coercing, Lying

Also related to preserving religious activity: Kishida Follows Anti-Family Federation Minister

Also related to preserving religious activity: Militant Lawyers Dictate Government Policy

Still more, related to preserving religious activity: Malicious One-Sided Government Source Selection

And still more, related to preserving religious activity: Japan Urged to Make U-Turn

And yet more, related to preserving religious activity: Dangerous Precedent to Crush Religions

Even more, related to preserving religious activity: Japan Following the Way of China

Yet more, related to preserving religious activity: Japanese Communists’ Final War

Still more, related to preserving religious activity: Political and Social Activism behind Oppression

Still more, related to preserving religious activity: Dissolution Case: Rule of Law on Trial 4th March