Authoritative analysis of Japan’s state persecution of religious minority by former chair of the US Commission on International Religious Freedom
The panel of speakers at a special sponsored dinner at the IRF Summit in Washington DC 5th February 2025, from left: Dr. Marco Respinti, director-in-charge of Bitter Winter; Norishige Kondo, Deputy Director of Legal Affairs of the Family Federation of Japan; Attorney Tatsuki Nakayama from Japan; Katrina Lantos Swett, former chair of the US Commission on International Religious Freedom; Attorney Patricia Duval, expert on international human rights law. Photo: Screenshot from live transmission
Q: Dr. Katrina Lantos Swett, in 2022 in the Real Clear Politics magazine, you wrote that Japan, which has been a beacon of democracy and protection of human rights for several decades, is flirting with the idea of trampling on religious freedom in a move that is much more reminiscent of practices in Russia and China. Japan’s government now threatens to dissolve a legally constituted religious group for seemingly political reasons.
[…] You also added, that dissolving a religious organization that has not been found guilty of any crime would taint the image of Japan as a country committed to democratic principles. Will you elaborate on that comment and share your thoughts?
Lantos Swett: Absolutely! It’s deeply disturbing what Japan is contemplating doing. And if they go forward with this, it will be an enormous stain on Japan’s claim to being a liberal constitutional democracy.
If they were attempting to do that in this country, they would be laughed out of court. It would be so clearly and uncontestably unconstitutional.
And really, if we look at the protections for fundamental religious freedom that Japan has supposedly signed on to, supposedly enshrined in its law, it really should be seen as unlawful in the Japanese context as well.
And what we find is this pattern of twisting laws around fraud, which you referred to, to try and create a crime that does not exist, to try and create a basis for prosecution that is entirely manufactured.
It is not only incredibly unfair to this community, this wonderful faith community that actually has been a boon and a blessing to Japanese society, but it is deeply undermining the pillars of what Japan, modern Japan, is supposed to stand for. So, I find it very concerning.
I appreciated the remarks from former speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, citing all of the respected international voices that have spoken out against this, from the United Nations to the Biden administration.
And I echo his hope that the Trump administration, which we expect to be very, very strongly pro-religious freedom, is going to use its leverage to let Japan know, “Don’t do this!”
A few years ago when we had a discussion about this, I said that friends don’t let friends drive drunk. And on this issue, Japan is driving its legal and constitutional vehicle right off a cliff. And we hope that they’ll pull back onto the road before they make a huge error. […]
Q: […] We heard that the United Nations Rapporteurs on Human Rights and Religious Freedom issued a mandate to Japan expressing concern that the country is violating religious freedom. It’s very important for the Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Family Federation. […] Yet, this mandate seems not to have affected the government in Japan. I would really like to hear your comment on that.
Lantos Swett: It is outrageous, and it is, I think, an example of what we would in this country call the weaponization of the law, weaponization of justice, weaponization of the media.
It is a kind of despicable picking of a target that the powers that be think they can get away with scapegoating, marginalizing, and ultimately destroying.
And it is a really awful reflection on Japan’s commitment to some of the most fundamental values that underlie a strong and democratic society – the rule of law, equal treatment under the law, not weaponizing the government against a community they think they can whip up anger towards.
Those should be the crown jewels of a country. And yet in Japan, we see a willingness to abandon all of this in this single-minded desire to attack a faith community.
You say they haven’t responded to some of the pressure that’s been brought to bear upon them. I think that’s very, very unfortunate.
We are, as all of us know, still in the opening days of a new administration here in this country, and it’s been something of a tornado of activity.
I think we’re all trying to catch our breath because things have been happening in a fast and furious way. But one of the things I think that the new Trump administration is demonstrating is what it looks like when the United States uses its leverage in a maximum way to try and achieve a policy goal
It isn’t always diplomatic, it isn’t always in accordance with the traditional norms that we’re used to, but it has the potential to yield some results.
And as someone who is passionate about international religious freedom, somebody who of course has admiration for Japan in so many ways but wants to see Japan pull back from this cliff and get back on the right track, I hope that perhaps the new Trump administration will exert some of that tough leverage with Japan on behalf of religious freedom.
We’ll say very simply if this was happening in our country – and Japan’s legal system, constitutional system, the embrace of democratic norms, and international human rights are not that different from what we have here in this country – again, they would be laughed out of court. Some of these practices seem more like suborning perjury [See editor’s note below] or a bill of attainder [See editor’s note below].
For our members of the audience who don’t know what that is, you can’t, under the U.S. Constitution, write, draft a law that is specifically targeted to entrap and attack and accuse and imprison and convict one individual or one group. That’s not lawful. That’s not the way a democracy functions.
And so, Japan is straying into some very dangerous territory, and ultimately most dangerous for Japan itself.
It does not want to lose its ability to count itself among those countries that stand for the rule of law, that stand for religious freedom, that stand for equal treatment under the law.
So, we’re waiting to see who the Trump administration will appoint as the ambassador at large for religious freedom.
We are going to hear from Vice President Vance tomorrow at the summit, which is very exciting.
And I think friends of the Family Federation, but more importantly, friends of religious liberty globally, need to reach out to the administration and say, “This is wrong! Japan’s a friend. Japan’s an ally. We can help them do better.”
And maybe it’ll take a little tough love from America to help that happen.
[Editor’s note: To suborn perjury means to persuade, induce, or coerce someone to commit perjury – that is, to lie under oath in a legal proceeding. This is a criminal offense because it obstructs justice and undermines the integrity of the judicial system. For example, if a lawyer or defendant convinces a witness to falsely testify in court, that would be suborning perjury. In many jurisdictions, this crime carries serious penalties, including fines and imprisonment.]
[Editor’s note: A bill of attainder is a law that declares a person or group guilty of a crime and imposes punishment without a trial. These laws bypass the judicial system, denying individuals due process. The U.S. Constitution explicitly prohibits bills of attainder at both the federal (Article I, Section 9) and state (Article I, Section 10) levels, ensuring that punishment can only be imposed through fair legal proceedings. Historically, bills of attainder were used by monarchs and legislatures to punish political enemies without a trial, which is why they are now considered a violation of fundamental rights.]
Featured image above: Dr. Katrina Lantos Swett speaking at a special sponsored dinner at the IRF Summit in Washington DC 5th February 2025. Photo: Screenshot from live transmission.