Families and legal experts gave a mixed assessment to a new law aimed at providing relief to the kin of followers of religious organizations and other groups who suffered severe financial hardship as a result of unscrupulous fundraising practices.

The law passed by the Diet on Dec. 10 came in response to harrowing stories that emerged in connection with the Unification Church, now formally called the Family Federation for World Peace and Unification, which is renowned for its aggressive donation tactics.

A second-generation follower of the Unification Church who lives in the Kansai region expressed deep disappointment with the law, saying it has many loopholes. 

“I am afraid the law will not prove to be a big help in preventing massive donations (made under pressure) and providing relief to victims,” said the woman, who is in her 30s. 

Her parents joined the Unification Church around 30 years ago, and since then have donated more than 100 million yen ($735,000) to the church, selling property to raise funds. As a result, her family was impoverished with hardly enough money to buy even food. 

The new law has a provision that allows followers to cancel donations if they were in a “state of confusion” as a result of intimidation or other dubious tactics. It lists six inappropriate acts.

But the woman griped that it is difficult to prove a donor was “confused” when deciding to make a donation.

She said her parents willingly offered money to the church out of a sense of mission to make the family happy. 

The law also stipulates that “sufficient consideration” must be given to “religious freedom” of individuals and organizations. 

Following Diet debate, a clause was added to the bill to oblige “sufficient consideration” not to suppress “free will” of potential donors when soliciting donations. 

But the woman dismissed that as merely a “play on words.” 

“The law should have used the word banned” without leaving room for other interpretation, she said. 

A former second-generation follower in her 30s who lives in the Kanto region praised the law as “the first big step toward bringing relief to victims.” 

But she called for a future review of the law to assess whether it is working.

Her parents, followers of the church, donated about 160 million yen to the church. In September, her family began negotiations with the church for the return of the donations in full but subsequently had to accept a payment of only around 30 million yen. 

Under the new law, children and spouses of followers can demand the return of donations if they were deprived of financial support as a result. But only dependent relatives can take such action, not other family members who maintain separate households. 

This is due to a donor’s constitutional right to own property. 

The former adherent called for the right to cancel donations by family members on grounds family budgets to educate children could be significantly affected by the handover of large sums of money.

“How many victims will be rescued by this law remains open to question,” she said. “A study should be commissioned at some point to examine how many people were actually rescued so the law can be revised if necessary.” 

Tatsuo Hashida, who is 65 and a resident of Kochi Prefecture, hailed the legislation as an initial step in the right direction. He has spent years seeking the return of the bulk of donations his former wife made to the church.

He also called for continued Diet debate to review the law from the viewpoint of making it easier for family members to seek the return of donations.

The National Network of Lawyers Against Spiritual Sales, which assists those who feel they were exploited by the Unification Church, denounced the new law as totally insufficient at a Dec. 10 news conference.

“It turned out to be a far cry from preventing future damages and offering relief to victims,” it said in a statement.

The group criticized the law for restricting the right of children and other family members to cancel donations made by their close relatives.

The network called for a system that allows third parties to cancel and manage donations in such situations under the supervision of a family court.

It also called on lawmakers to offer a clearer interpretation of what constituted prohibited acts during the solicitation of donations to reduce damages and expand relief as much as possible.

Katsuomi Abe, a lawyer with the network, told the news conference that Diet members in his view did not spend enough time to flesh out details of the legislation.

“It should have been possible to create a relief system that coordinates the right to own property and self-determination and freedom of religion,” he said.