Scholar: Government Mishandling Dissolution Case

Rushed justice behind closed doors: Japanese scholar raises alarms on due process and religious rights as freedom of religion is undermined

Tokyo, 10th April 2025 – Published as an article in the Japanese newspaper Sekai Nippo. Republished with permission. Translated from Japanese. Original article. 

State Intervention as “Interference with Freedom of Religion”

Interview with Religious Scholar Toshihiro Ota (Part 1)

by Tsuyoshi Toyoda (豊田 剛)

See part 2, part 3 of interview

The Tokyo District Court recently issued a dissolution order for the Family Federation for World Peace and Unification (FFWPU, formerly the Unification Church). We spoke with religious scholar Toshihiro Ota (大田俊寛), who has studied the history of Western religious thought and “cult issues” like Aum Shinrikyo, about the legitimacy of this dissolution, the meaning of freedom of religion, and the issues with the Family Federation.

Interviewer: Tsuyoshi Toyoda (豊田 剛)

Questioning the process of resolving religious issues

– What are your thoughts on the Tokyo District Court’s decision to order the dissolution of the Family Federation?

Overall, my impression is: Why was there such a rush to complete the process? Freedom of religion is so vital that it’s often referred to as the “human right of human rights” and is deeply tied to the very purpose of the modern state.

I believe that a decision should have been made only after thoroughly examining the situation with as much transparency as possible and through repeated discussion and careful deliberation. If the decision is not convincing to many people – including Family Federation believers – it won’t lead to a true resolution of the issue and may leave future concerns unresolved. This decision might, in fact, backfire and lead to a broader and more complicated problem down the line.

– The court rendered its judgment behind closed doors and essentially assumed guilt. Was the process flawed?

Not just the trial – but also Prime Minister Fumio Kishida’s (岸田文雄) sudden reinterpretation of the law, the Agency for Cultural Affairs’ internal Religious Corporation Council deliberations, and the repeated use of the “right to question” – all of these steps were carried out in secrecy. I was honestly astonished by how little information was disclosed. As things stand, we’re not even in a position to verify whether the government’s actions were valid or rational.

The issues surrounding the Unification Church are extremely complex (multifaceted), but the government moved straight to a conclusion without thoroughly considering all aspects. That is deeply concerning.

Ideally, when dealing with religious issues, the state should first listen carefully to both victims and the religious group, issue appropriate recommendations for improvement, and if there’s no change, apply some form of monitoring or oversight. Only when the problems persist should a dissolution order be considered – with care and flexibility. Sadly, the Japanese government’s response this time seems to deviate significantly from that ideal.

– The court decision claims it does not prohibit or restrict freedom of religion. What’s your view on that?

As I mentioned in my book The Complete History of Monotheism, the modern concept of freedom of religion was first clearly defined by the 17th-century British philosopher John Locke in A Letter Concerning Toleration. In it, Locke argues that under normal conditions, the separation of church and state must be maintained, and the state should not intervene in religious matters. However, he also states that if public order is fundamentally threatened or citizens’ lives and property are at risk, the state must intervene in religious issues.

Naturally, when such intervention happens, some infringement on religious freedom is inevitable. Therefore, the state must be fully aware and prepared for this and ensure its intervention is both reasonable and minimal.

In the case of the Family Federation, interference with religious freedom had already occurred at the point the government began intervening. Despite that, the court’s verdict document states at its conclusion that the dissolution order was “not intended to infringe upon the spiritual or religious aspects of the religious corporation or its believers.”

From the perspective of someone who has studied the history of religious thought, this statement is difficult to accept. It feels like a surgeon saying, “I performed major surgery with a scalpel, but I didn’t harm the body or cause any pain.” It just doesn’t make sense.

Lowering the bar for dissolution of religious corporations

– Do you think this court decision could affect other religious organizations?

According to modern state principles, targeting a specific religious group alone is unacceptable. The standards applied to the Family Federation must be equally applied to all religious organizations. That said, this particular dissolution order was clearly influenced by public outcry following the assassination of former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe (安倍晋三). So it’s unlikely that other religious groups will be immediately affected.

However, it’s undeniable that the government’s actions have significantly lowered the threshold for dissolving religious corporations, and the criteria for doing so have become less clear. It will be necessary to eventually disclose all the currently undisclosed procedural details and seriously reconsider whether the steps taken were truly appropriate and what approach should be followed in the future.

See part 2, part 3 of interview

Toshihiro Ota (大田俊寛) – Born in 1974. Graduated from the Faculty of Sociology at Hitotsubashi University. Completed doctoral studies in Religious Studies and the History of Religion at the University of Tokyo’s Graduate School of Humanities and Sociology. Holds a Doctorate in Literature. Currently a part-time lecturer at Saitama University. Specializes in religious studies. Major works include “The Complete History of Monotheism” (Vol. 1 & 2, Kawade Shobo Shinsha), “The Thought of Gnosticism” (Shunjusha), and “The Spiritual History of Aum Shinrikyo” (Shunjusha).

Featured image above: A handful from the Kishida administration meeting behind closed doors. Illustration: Grok xAI, 2025.

Related to scholar on government mishandling: Japan Following the Way of China

Also related to scholar on government mishandling: Media/Legal Expert: Communism Behind Persecution

Also related to scholar on government mishandling: “Poorly Compiled Evidence Including Falsehoods”

And also related to scholar on government mishandling: Huge Scandal: “Ministry Is Falsifying Affidavits”

Also related to scholar on government mishandling: Japan’s New Laws to Curb New Religious Movements

Also related to scholar on government mishandling: New Law Designed to Bankrupt Family Federation

Also related to scholar on government mishandling: Hamada: Political Forces Behind Dissolution Push

Also related to scholar on government mishandling: Religious Faith Framed as Mental Health Concern

Also related to scholar on government mishandling: Terms from Consumer Law Used to Rob Faith

And also related to scholar on government mishandling: New Law Manufacturing “Victims”, Dividing Families

And also related to scholar on government mishandling: Maverick Minister Lets “3 Foxes in the Henhouse”

More, related to scholar on government mishandling: Journalist Reveals Ugly Leftwing Conspiracy

And more, related to scholar on government mishandling: Militant Lawyers Dictate Government Policy

And more, related to scholar on government mishandling: Media Helping Terrorist Reach His Goal

Related to scholar on government mishandling: Kishida Administration Giving in to Terrorism

Related to scholar on government mishandling: Bizarre Atlantic Report Condoning Terror

Related to scholar on government mishandling: Japan Times: Warning of Terror

Related to scholar on government mishandling: Did constant hate-mongering cause terror?

Also related to scholar on government mishandling: Dissolution Case: Wild Claims, Illegal Actions

Also related to scholar on government mishandling: 2nd-Generation Members Protesting Persecution

Also related to scholar on government mishandling: Inhuman Government-Supported Mass Deprogramming

And also related to scholar on government mishandling: Bias: No Right to Respond for Religious Minority

More, related to scholar on government mishandling: Collusion to Rob Minority of Its Rights

And more, related to scholar on government mishandling: State and Media Creating “Today’s Non-Citizens”

Still more, related to scholar on government mishandling: Japan Criticized for Glaring Rights Violations

Even more, related to scholar on government mishandling: Two European Scholars Warning Japan

And yet more, related to scholar on government mishandling: Japan Censured at Religious Freedom Event

And even more, related to scholar on government mishandling: Inhuman Government-Supported Mass Deprogramming

And still more, related to scholar on government mishandling: Malicious One-Sided Government Source Selection

More, related to scholar on government mishandling: Government’s Foul Play Pointed Out