What is the Unification Church and why did a Japanese court order it dissolved?
That changed in 2022, when former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe was assassinated. The man accused of shooting Abe allegedly was motivated by the former prime minister's links to the church and blamed it for bankrupting his family. The killing drew public attention and prompted investigations into the church's practices and its links to powerful politicians.
What is the Unification Church?
Advertisement
The church was founded in Seoul in 1954, a year after the end of the Korean War, by the late Rev. Sun Myung Moon, the self-proclaimed messiah who preached new interpretations of the Bible and conservative, family-oriented value systems.
The church, which officially calls itself the Family Federation for World Peace and Unification, champions anti-communism and the unification of the Korean Peninsula, which has been split between the totalitarian North and democratic South.
The church is perhaps best known for mass weddings where it paired off couples, often from different countries, and renewed the vows of those already married, at places like stadiums and gymnasiums. The group is said to have a global membership of millions, including hundreds of thousands in Japan.
The church faced accusations in the 1970s and '80s of using devious recruitment tactics and brainwashing adherents into turning over huge portions of their salaries to Moon. The church has denied the allegations, saying many new religious movements face similar accusations in their early years.
Experts say Japanese followers are asked to pay for sins committed by their ancestors during Japan's 1910-1945 colonial rule of the Korean Peninsula, and that the majority of the church's worldwide funding comes from Japan.
Advertisement
Why was the church ordered dissolved?
The Education Ministry asked a Tokyo court to dissolve the church in October 2023, accusing it of trying to steer its followers' decision-making, using manipulative tactics, making them buy expensive goods and donate beyond their financial ability, and causing fear and harm to them and their families.
On Tuesday, the Tokyo District court granted the request, writing that the church's problems were extensive and continuous, and a dissolution order is necessary because it is not likely it could voluntarily reform, according to NHK television.
The Unification Church is the first religious group to face a revocation order under Japan's civil code. Two earlier case involved criminal charges — the Aum Shinrikyo doomsday cult, which carried out a sarin nerve gas attack on the Tokyo subway system, and Myokakuji group, whose executives were convicted of fraud.
The Japanese branch of the church has criticized the request as a serious threat to religious freedom and the human rights of its followers. In a statement Tuesday, it called the court order 'truely regrettable' and 'unjust,' adding that the decision is based on 'a wrong legal interpretation and absolutely unacceptable.'
How did the church come under scruntiny in Japan?
The 2022 assassination of former Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and subsequent investigations unearthed decades of cozy ties between the Unification Church and Japan's governing Liberal Democratic Party and triggered public outrage.
The man accused of shooting Abe at a campaign event allegedly told police he was motivated by the former prime minister's links to the church, which he said bankrupted his family due to his mother's excessive donations.
Abe was known for his arch-conservative views on security and history issues and appeared at events organized by church affiliates.
Advertisement
What are the church's links to world leaders?
Throughout his life, Moon worked to make his church into a worldwide religious movement and expand its business and charitable activities. Moon was convicted of tax evasion in 1982 and served a prison term in New York. He died in 2012.
The church has developed relations with conservative world leaders including U.S. presidents Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush and more recently Donald Trump.
Moon also had ties with North Korea's founder Kim Il Sung, the late grandfather of current ruler Kim Jong Un.
Moon said in his autobiography that he asked Kim to give up his nuclear ambitions, and that Kim responded that his atomic program was for peaceful purposes and he had no intention to use it to 'kill (Korean) compatriots.'
Associated Press writer Hyung-jin Kim in Seoul, South Korea, contributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Buzz Feed
20 hours ago
- Buzz Feed
Dan Rather's Defense Of A Gay Rights Icon Against Pete Hegseth Is Going Viral
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth told the Navy to rename a ship named after iconic civil rights leader Harvey Milk. For those who don't know, Harvey Milk was one of the first openly gay elected officials in US history and a pioneering gay rights activist. In 1977, he was elected to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, where he promoted anti-discrimination laws/LGBTQ rights before being assassinated in 1978. Harvey served as an officer in the US Navy during the Korean War before being forced to leave the military because of suspicions about his sexual orientation. A ship was named after him in 2016. Now, ABC news reports an official told them the renaming of the ship during Pride Month was intentional. Veteran journalist Dan Rather posted a response on Facebook, and it's going mega viral. Here it is: The comments are one of the rare areas online lately not full of garbage: "Kind of a backhanded compliment! Now I know who he is and why the Navy honored him in the first place," one person commented. "They say they want to promote a 'warrior culture.' Milk was most definitely a warrior, as well as a decorated Navy veteran," another person said. And this person joked, "Could we then rename the Titanic the Hegseth?" Then there are a bunch of people who said the post caused them to look up Harvey Milk for the first time. "I never knew of Harvey Milk. Thank you, Hegseth for educating me about this great American hero," one person wrote. "I didn't know that the U.S. Navy had a ship named after Milk. Now I do," another person commented. And this person said, "I didn't even know that Mr. Milk was a veteran, but now I do!" I guess it's working!
UPI
a day ago
- UPI
Lee Jae-myung, Trump speak on phone, reaffirm U.S.-South Korea alliance
New South Korean President Lee Jae Myung appears at a news conference at the presidential office in Seoul, South Korea, on Wednesday, his first remarks after being inaugurated earlier in the day. Photo by Ahn Young-joon/EPA-EFE/pool June 7 (UPI) -- South Korea's President Lee Jae-myung spoke for the first time with U.S. President Donald Trump late Friday as both leaders agreed to further strengthen their nations' alliance. Lee, who took office Wednesday, talked with Trump in a 20-minute phone call, according to the presidential office of South Korea. The White House has not confirmed the conversation, and the president, who is in New Jersey this weekend, hasn't posted about the call on Truth Social. The two presidents agreed to strive toward reaching a mutually acceptable trade agreement, including on tariffs. Trump has imposed 10% baseline tariffs on most trading partners. On April 2, Trump said the Republic of Korea would face a 49% duty but one week later he paused it for three months along with the other worst offenders in the trade imbalance. South Korea's tariffs on imported agricultural goods average 54%. Trump congratulated Lee on his election victory, and the new leader expressed his gratitude, according to the office. Lee noted the importance of the alliance, which forms the foundation of Seoul's diplomacy. The phone call was "conducted in a friendly and candid atmosphere," as they shared anecdotes and experiences from their election campaigns, according to South Korea's presidential office. They exchanged views on their assassination attempts last year and political challenges, in addition to discussing their their golf skills and agreed to play a round together. Trump invited Lee to the White House and the Group of Seven summit in Alberta, Canada, from June 15-17. South Korea is not a G7 member state, but the nation attended them group's meetings in 2021 and 2023. Korea's neighbor, Japan, is a member of the G7. Yonhap reported the South Korea government is in consultations for Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba and Chinese President Xi Jinping to speak to their leader. It has not been decided whether Lee will attend the North Atlantic Treaty Organization leaders' summit in the Netherlands on June 24 and 25, according to the presidential office. Lee, the Democratic Party liberal candidate, won in a landslide over Kim Moon-soo of the conservative People Power Party. He was inaugurated the next day on Wednesday. South Koreans turned out in record numbers in a snap election triggered by the impeachment and removal of Yoon Suk Yeol in April after a botched martial law decree. Some 35.24 million voters cast a ballot, representing a turnout of 79.4% -- the highest mark since an 80.7% turnout in 1997.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
It Would Be So Funny If Trump Nationalized Elon Musk's Companies
As one of the century's stupidest, most high-profile feuds escalated yesterday, President Donald Trump at one point threatened to cancel the U.S. government's expansive contracts with SpaceX and Tesla, companies that are both at least nominally headed by ketamine enthusiast and Grimes-ex Elon Musk. In response, Musk threatened to 'immediately' decommission SpaceX's Dragon spacecraft, currently America's only means of shuttling astronauts to and from the International Space Station. An X user with fewer than 200 followers then appeared to negotiate some kind of détente on the matter, prompting Musk to back down. The bizarre, petulant, helplessly transfixing back-and-forth was a reminder that, while Musk's time as a 'special government employee' may be over, he's still very much a part of the U.S. government. His business empire has been built on government largesse, whether through SpaceX's expansive contracts with NASA, Starlink satellites, or the clean car rule compliance credits that have accounted for 34 percent of Tesla's profits since 2012. As The Washington Post reported in February, Musk's businesses have over the years received $38 billion in government contracts, loans, subsidies, and tax credits. In many ways, Musk owes his fortune to the U.S. government. A truce between Trump and Musk may be imminent, but, if he wishes to use it, Trump has a powerful wild card for sticking it to Musk: nationalize his companies. A similar idea was floated online yesterday by Steve Bannon, the odious former film producer and Trump confidant, who suggested using the Defense Production Act to 'seize' SpaceX. The wide-ranging Korean War–era policy outlines several steps by which the White House can bypass Congress to intervene in the demand and supply sides of particular industries. Those powers can include directing private companies to prioritize orders from the federal government, issuing loans and loan guarantees, and allocating 'materials, services, and facilities' from corporations. Just this week, Trump invoked the Defense Production Act to boost production of so-called critical minerals and weapons. A waiver published to the Federal Register on Wednesday claims that shortfalls of either would 'severely impair national defense capability.' The Biden administration similarly leveraged the Defense Production Act to spur on the domestic production of graphite, a key component of the lithium-ion batteries used in military energy systems and electric vehicles. Both presidents turned to the law during the Covid-19 pandemic to address medical supply chain shortages and accelerate vaccine production. As the Roosevelt Institute's Todd Tucker has pointed out, the Defense Production Act has been continually updated to give the White House broader authority over energy, in particular. Its 2009 reauthorization specifically excised language in previous versions that restricted the government's ability to directly engage in energy production. After 9/11, the Defense Production Act's definition of 'national defense' was updated to include the protection and restoration of 'critical infrastructure,' a legal designation of 16 sectors deemed essential to the functioning of the economy, including telecoms, information technology, and transportation. In theory, that is, the Defense Production Act offers Donald Trump a massive toolbox with which to intervene in Musk's business. He could stick it to the richest man on earth by ordering Tesla to stop making Cybertrucks and start making electric buses, or forcing Starlink to provide free internet service to everyone in the country. As Bannon hinted, the law also opens up the possibility of requiring recipients of government funding—including those who have received loans and contracts—to give the government equity stakes in exchange. The first Trump administration did just that in 2020, when the Treasury Department sought equity stakes in publicly traded national security contractors, including defense firms, looking to receive the $17 billion set aside for them in coronavirus relief funds. Tying federal funding to public equity stakes is a common practice in other countries that's somewhat rare in the U.S. The most prominent example in recent memory was when the federal government spent $50 billion on a 61 percent equity stake in General Motors, bailing out the automaker after its bankruptcy in 2009. While this move theoretically empowered the White House to enact wide-ranging reforms—correcting for the kinds of mistakes that had plunged GM into financial ruin in the first place—presidential advisers, including Larry Summers, then the head of the National Economic Council, pushed the Obama administration to instead act as a 'reluctant equity owner' and 'not interfere with or exert control over day-to-day company operations.' The concept of the government seeking a 'golden share' in certain companies has already come up during Trump 2.0. Trump obliquely floated the possibility of the U.S. receiving an equity stake as part of Nippon Steel's controversial takeover of U.S. Steel, entitling the government to an advisory role that could allow it to outvote other shareholders on major issues like mergers and asset sales. Given the sheer scale of Musk's dealings with the federal government—business he seemed eager to expand during his disastrous time in Washington—there are any number of options for Trump to bolster government oversight of SpaceX and Tesla, including, potentially, buying up shares. Republican attacks on both electric vehicle incentives and California's clean car rules, moreover, may end up costing Tesla billions of dollars, JP Morgan Chase analysts have found. Tesla is already struggling amid flagging sales in the U.S. and abroad; earlier this year at the White House, Trump even hosted a bizarre infomercial for Tesla, seemingly aimed at boosting the company's fortunes. It's not impossible to imagine that Tesla might at some point come begging for another handout, offering Trump the opportunity to do what Barack Obama couldn't: play an active role in the day-to-day operations of a U.S. automaker. To state the obvious, it is vanishingly unlikely that Donald Trump will use either public equity stakes or the Defense Production Act toward progressive ends. In March, his administration removed solar panels, heat pumps, and other green technologies from the Defense Production Act's purview by rescinding several Biden-era executive orders. Doing so, though, would make Elon Musk really, really mad. If Trump is too afraid to exert that kind of power over Musk—who has demonstrated time and again his alarming sway over the federal government—whichever Democrat makes it to the White House next shouldn't be.
