Empowering the Heavenly Parent Holy Community
... The Tokyo High Court’s decision, by embracing the language of “psychological influence,” crosses a line that democratic societies have long recognized as dangerous. The consequences will extend far beyond the Unification Church unless this…
... Many religious figures have remained silent for the past four years out of fear of being branded as part of a “cult”. Even among legal professionals, some choose to look the other way.
... Unlawfulness has not been proven, yet a social death sentence is being declared. Can such a thing be permitted?” The group also urged the Supreme Court, where a special appeal has been filed by…
... The Tokyo High Court ruling raises deep concerns about the line between legitimate legal oversight and unwarranted intrusion into religious belief. These concerns will not fade with this decision and will influence the future…
... The High Court decision itself acknowledged that “it cannot be definitively determined” that unlawful acts occurred due to lack of facts and evidence, while simultaneously stating that “the possibility cannot be denied.”
... Even though the legal mechanism of this case is common, the subject matter is highly unusual. The dissolution of a religious corporation in Japan is extremely rare. It raises constitutional questions about religion and…
... The Happiness Realization Party is speaking out because the case could establish a legal precedent allowing the Japanese state to dissolve religious organizations based on civil liability, which religious movements see as a potential…
... The fundamental human rights that Japanese citizens normally enjoy are now at risk of being taken away. I believe the organisation must urgently demand that the government strongly protect and safeguard the human rights…
... It is profoundly regrettable that, despite the absence of concrete evidence of any violation of statutory law and without due recognition of the efforts made toward reform and improvement, the District Court’s dissolution order…
... the Court used tautological and highly fallacious reasoning: dissolution based on public welfare is legitimate, therefore it is legitimate under international human rights law.