Selective Justice: Special Law Against One Faith

Unequal treatment under the law: Scholar points out the selective justice and legal flaws in Japan’s liquidation guidelines

Tokyo, 30^th December 2025 – Published as an article in the Japanese newspaper Sekai Nippo. Republished with permission. Translated from Japanese. Original article. 

[Interview Feature] The Dark Side of the “Special Measures Law” Targeting the Family Federation (Part 2)

Legislation That Runs Counter to the Principles of the Rule of Law

Part 2 of interview with Seishiro Sugihara, former professor at Musashino Women’s University and expert on issues of freedom of religion and constitutional law

by the Religious Freedom Investigative Team of the editorial department of Sekai Nippo

See part 1 of the interview: Expert: “Is Dissolution Framework Constitutional?”

See also Court Rejects Media Narrative in Yamagami Case

See also Dissolution Case: Courts Must Not Reward Terror

See also Japan: Lawyers Accused of Wilful Dehumanization

See also Japan: “MEXT Fabrication” Storm Grows Online

See also Figures from Hostile Lawyers Hugely Inflated

‒ What is your view on the purpose and intent of the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology’s (MEXT) “Guidelines on the Liquidation of Designated Religious Corporations” (the “Guidelines”), which appear to have the Family Federation for World Peace and Unification (formerly the Unification Church) specifically in mind?

In the section of the Guidelines titled “Responses Such as Compensation to Victims”, it states:

“The liquidator shall respond sincerely to victims so that not a single victim is left behind, including victims who reported damages within the creditor claim period and those known to the liquidator, as well as victims who reported damages after the expiration of the creditor claim period…”

At first glance, this may appear reasonable. However, in effect, it demands an almost limitless commitment to victim relief exclusively in the case of the Family Federation. This is neither fair nor equitable when compared with victims who may have suffered harm involving other religious corporations.

‒ The Guidelines also include language under “Measures to Encourage the Reporting of Harm,” such as: “Inquiring of a certain range of counterparties identified from records substantiating donations held by the liquidating corporation as to whether they intend to report harm,” and “Based on a comparison between those who donated disproportionately large sums and the number of reported victims, it can be objectively assumed that a considerable number of potential victims exist.” These passages seem to presume that high-value donors are potential victims.

In principle, when money or property is donated to a religious corporation based on faith, the donor cannot later demand its return simply because they have lost that faith. The sole exception is when the religious corporation has committed an unlawful act ‒ but even then, such unlawfulness must be legally established through an open judicial process.

For a liquidator to arbitrarily determine that a donation was “disproportionately large”, or to define a “certain range” of individuals as victims based on the organization’s donation records, is an outrageous act that ignores the very essence of freedom of religion.

‒ What do you see as the root cause of these problems inherent in the Guidelines?

The root lies in the law enacted exactly two months after 13^th October 2023, when the Minister of Education requested the Tokyo District Court to issue a dissolution order against the Family Federation. That law is formally titled: “The Act on Special Provisions for the Operations of the Japan Legal Support Center to Facilitate the Prompt and Smooth Relief of Victims of Specific Illegal Acts, and Special Provisions on the Disposal and Management of Assets by Religious Corporations” (the “Special Measures Law”).

This law was enacted to monitor the movement of the Family Federation’s assets in the event that unlawful acts are established, and damages must be paid. To that extent, there was some rationale for its enactment. However, at its core, the law privileges only victims associated with the Family Federation.

Moreover, Article 5 of the Supplementary Provisions states:

“This Act shall lose its effect on the day three years have elapsed from the date of its enforcement.”

This means that, in practical terms, the law targets only the Family Federation.

Under the principles of the rule of law, special legislation limited to a specific subject is permissible when it confers benefits upon that subject. However, legislation that imposes disadvantages on a specific target is not permitted. A special law that singles out only one religious corporation for disadvantage must never be enacted under the banner of the rule of law, legal governance, or a law-based state.

Accordingly, this law must be abolished. The fact that the House of Representatives Legislative Bureau, the House of Councillors Legislative Bureau, and the Diet itself allowed such legislation to be enacted is something that defies ordinary legal common sense.

‒ This law was introduced as a members’ bill.

The bill was submitted by six lawmakers: three from the Liberal Democratic Party, two from Komeito, and one from the Democratic Party for the People. That members of Komeito were among the sponsors is nothing short of outrageous.

If one were to look back far enough, Soka Gakkai [See editor’s noe 1 below] ‒ the religious organization that forms the foundation of Komeito ‒ would undoubtedly have its own share of scandals. There would also be countless individuals who could claim to have suffered harm in the past. How, then, can a political party backed by Soka Gakkai become a sponsor of a law that, for a limited time, targets only other religious corporations?

If the intention is merely to save oneself while others are sacrificed, then this behavior is even more reprehensible than Kandata in Ryūnosuke Akutagawa’s “The Spider’s Thread.” [See editor’s note 2 below]

See part 1 of the interview: Expert: “Is Dissolution Framework Constitutional?”

See also Court Rejects Media Narrative in Yamagami Case

See also Dissolution Case: Courts Must Not Reward Terror

See also Japan: Lawyers Accused of Wilful Dehumanization

See also Japan: “MEXT Fabrication” Storm Grows Online

See also Figures from Hostile Lawyers Hugely Inflated

Featured image above: Seishiro Sugihara (杉原誠四郎), former professor at Musashino Women’s University and expert on issues of freedom of religion and constitutional law. Photo: Sekai Nippo

[Editor’s note 1: 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.]

[Editor’s note 2: In Ryūnosuke Akutagawa’s short story “The Spider’s Thread” (Kumo no Ito), Kandata is the central human figure and a condemned sinner in Buddhist Hell.

Kandata is portrayed as a notorious criminal ‒ a robber and murderer ‒ who suffers torment in Hell for his many crimes. However, during his life he once performed a single act of compassion: he spared a spider instead of killing it. This small deed is remembered by the Buddha.

Moved by this lone good act, the Buddha lowers a spider’s thread into Hell, giving Kandata an opportunity to climb out and attain salvation. Kandata begins to ascend successfully, but when he notices other sinners climbing up the same thread behind him, he becomes selfish and possessive, shouting for them to get off. At that moment, the thread snaps, and Kandata falls back into Hell.]

Related to selective justice: Lawfare: State Uses Legal System in War on Faith

Also related to selective justice: MEXT’s Legal Spin and “Dissolution at All Costs”

Also related to selective justice: UN Report: Japan’s Lawfare Against Faith Minority

And also related to selective justice: Protesting No Transparency in Closed-Door Trial

More, related to selective justice: Dangerous Flaws in Dissolution Order Decried

Also related to selective justice: “Lawyers Lying and Shaming Japan” for 50 Years

And also related to selective justice: Japan Following the Way of China

And also related to selective justice: Japan’s Dissolution Case Echoes China’s Playbook

More, related to selective justice: Media/Legal Expert: Communism Behind Persecution

And more, related to selective justice: Militant Lawyers Dictate Government Policy

More, related to selective justice: Collusion to Rob Minority of Its Rights

And more, related to selective justice: State and Media Creating “Today’s Non-Citizens”

Still more, related to selective justice: Japan Copying China: State Seizure of Churches

And still more, related to selective justice: 12 Religious Freedom NGOs Denouncing Japan

More, related to selective justice: 4300 Abductions and Forcible Detentions

And more, related to selective justice: Japan: Families Fear for Graves of Loved Ones

Yet more, related to selective justice: Lawyers Manipulating, Coercing, Lying

Also related to selective justice: Kishida Follows Anti-Family Federation Minister

Also related to selective justice: Militant Lawyers Dictate Government Policy

Still more, related to selective justice: Malicious One-Sided Government Source Selection

Yet more, related to selective justice: Kishida’s Self-Defeating Populist Decisions

And still more, related to selective justice: Japan Urged to Make U-Turn

And yet more, related to selective justice: Dangerous Precedent to Crush Religions

Even more, related to selective justice: Japan Following the Way of China

Yet more, related to selective justice: Japanese Communists’ Final War

Still more, related to selective justice: Political and Social Activism behind Oppression