Right to Spiritual Self-Determination Denied

French human rights expert reveals in report to UN how members of religious minority in Japan are being denied their spiritual self-determination 

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 2 of comments on fifth article of Bitter Winter’s 5-part series

See part 1, part 3

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

See part 1, part 2, part 3 on third article of Bitter Winters 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: John Milton / Knut Holdhus 

Japan’s new laws implicitly support families who reject a member’s religious conversion, effectively denying the individual’s right to spiritual self-determination

In her recent report to the UN, Patricia Duval describes an alarming aspect of new laws passed in Japan that clearly violate “the right of Japanese citizens to freedom to adopt a new religion or belief”. Japan’s recent legislation aimed at the Family Federation allows families of members to claim damages based on the concept of “undue influence”, framing family estrangements linked to religious conversion as civil wrongs that make potential claimants suffer harm or loss. Critics argue that this move infringes upon individual rights to religious freedom, raising ethical and legal concerns about Japan’s approach to religious expression.

Family rights over donations and estrangement claims

Under the new law, families of Family Federation adherents can rescind donations made by relatives, asserting that undue influence was involved. Families who believe their kin were pressured into donating can contest these donations, even if the donors themselves have not objected. If a family suspects that a religious conversion influenced their kin’s behavior or financial decisions, they can contest donations made to the Family Federation and potentially sue for damages due to family estrangement.

A network of activist leftwing lawyers in Japan hostile to the Family Federation asserts that these provisions allow family members to claim damages, alleging that the Family Federation has caused family break-ups. This presumption is that Family Federation practices have negatively impacted familial harmony, warranting compensation. However, this interpretation has garnered criticism from scholars and advocates of religious freedom, who argue it ignores individual autonomy and fails to account for the diverse causes of family disputes.

International precedents on religious freedom and family disputes

In a similar case, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) addressed accusations from the Russian government against the Jehovah’s Witnesses, claiming the group’s practices led to family break-ups. The ECHR’s 2010 decision in “Jehovah’s Witnesses of Moscow v. Russia” ruled against this notion, noting that personal dedication to religious beliefs, if freely chosen, cannot be blamed for family conflict. The court stated,

“As long as self-dedication to religious matters is the product of the believer’s independent and free decision […], the ensuing estrangement cannot be taken to mean that the religion caused the break-up in the family” (§111).

This ruling highlights that family conflicts are complex and can arise from both sides’ unwillingness to compromise. It underscores the need for governments to respect individuals’ rights to freely choose their beliefs without automatically assigning blame to religious organizations for family disputes.

Japan’s stance on religious conversion and individual autonomy

Critics emphasize the troubling implications for personal autonomy. By enabling families to claim damages for religious conversions they deem harmful, Japan questions the ability of adult citizens to make independent spiritual choices. Reports of forcible faith-breaking practices in Japan, where families detain Family Federation adherents to coerce them into renouncing their beliefs, complicate this issue.

Despite the controversy surrounding such practices, Japan’s new law implicitly supports families who reject a member’s religious conversion, effectively denying the individual’s right to spiritual self-determination. This legal stance challenges the freedom of religious expression protected under international agreements like the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which Japan is a signatory. Under these frameworks, citizens retain the right to choose and manifest religious beliefs without fear of reprisal or interference.

Potential consequences of Japan’s approach

If implemented broadly, Japan’s legal measures could set a worrying precedent, encouraging similar actions in other countries where governments may seek to curtail minority religious practices. Advocates argue that these policies threaten not only religious freedom but also social harmony by perpetuating divisions within families and placing undue scrutiny on religious minorities.

Japan’s current approach positions the state as an arbiter in religious disputes, questioning the legitimacy of new religious movements. As international eyes turn to Japan, the outcome of these policies will be closely watched, as they carry potential implications for freedom of belief in other democratic societies worldwide.

Featured image above: From a Family Federation information stand in Oslo, Norway 16th July 2016. Photo: FFWPU

See part 1, 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, part 3 on third article of Bitter Winters 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 spiritual self-determination denied: Harsh Reality of 4300 Forcibly Deprogrammed

And more about spiritual self-determination denied: Lawyer Exposes Dirty Leftwing Plot

Yet more about spiritual self-determination denied: 12 Years of Forcible Detention and Awful Abuse

Still more about spiritual self-determination denied: Inhuman Government-Supported Mass Deprogramming

Even more about spiritual self-determination denied: Collusion to Rob Minority of Its Rights

And yet more about spiritual self-determination denied: Malicious One-Sided Government Source Selection

And still more about spiritual self-determination denied: Government’s Foul Play Pointed Out

And even more about spiritual self-determination denied: Lawyers Using Witnesses under Duress

And more about spiritual self-determination denied: Parents Pay for Activism of Pastors and Lawyers

More about spiritual self-determination denied: Vicious Smear Tactic Used to Hide Criminal Acts

More about spiritual self-determination denied: Lawyers Exploiting Fear of the Unknown

More about spiritual self-determination denied: Sinister Plot of Hostile Lawyers Exposed

And more, related to spiritual self-determination denied: Leaders from 18 Faiths Send Protest to Regime

Yet more, related to spiritual self-determination denied: UN Body Watching: Japan Triggering Hate Crimes