Photo/Illutration Tomihiro Tanaka, left, with Hideyuki Teshigawara, who heads the Unification Church’s reform promotion headquarters, at a news conference in Tokyo on Nov. 7 (Kazushige Kobayashi)

The Unification Church expressed “regret” for the huge and widespread damages caused by dubious activities committed by its followers but refused to offer a formal “apology” to victims.

The controversial religious organization’s latest statements concerning the scandal seem to suggest intentions to evade legal responsibility.

Mere lip service will not erase the mistrust of the group aroused by shady, unethical and, in many cases, illegal actions perpetrated by its adherents.

Nearly a month after the education ministry filed a petition with the Tokyo District Court for the dissolution of the group, formally known as the Family Federation for World Peace and Unification, it held a news conference on Nov. 7.

It was the first time in a year and three months that Tomihiro Tanaka, the president of the Japanese branch of the church, faced media inquiries since he did so after the assassination of former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe last summer, which cast the spotlight on the church’s various questionable activities.

Since the practice of pressuring adherents to make exorbitant donations, widely adopted within the church, came to light, Tanaka said the group had responded to 664 requests for refunds totaling about 4.4 billion yen ($29.15 million) by the end of last month.

He expressed his “regret” by bowing. However, the essence of what he said seemed to be an excuse aimed at shielding the organization from liability.

The word “apology” was deemed appropriate "only when the victims have been identified," he argued. Yet one must ask how the individuals who were coerced into making extraordinary amounts of contributions, resulting in the loss of their assets, should be called if not victims.

Tanaka contended that the cause of the problem was the “excesses” of rank-and-file members who solicited donations, acknowledging the group failed to provide proper guidance for how to solicit donations.

However, there have been more than 30 court rulings that acknowledged the religious corporation's liability for compensation.

Evidence produced by the government for filing a petition for the church’s disbandment includes manuals drafted by the group for the practice of disguising identities, deemed illegal by the court, and the art of language to provoke anxiety for “spiritual sales,” a type of psychic scam in which expensive items are sold to bring good fortune or protection.

These seem to be structural problems rooted in the organization’s culture of treating Hak Ja Han Moon, the church founder’s widow and its current leader, as the absolute authority.

Even after a “compliance declaration” issued in 2009, many people fell victim to the group’s devious tactics. It is difficult to put faith in its latest pledge to “reform” the church.

While refusing to disclose the scale of its assets, the sect made a sudden proposal to deposit up to 10 billion yen with the government as a reserve for compensation. This move also raises questions.

Before making such a proposal, seemingly designed to skirt legal liabilities, the church should first agree to the demand for some 4 billion yen of compensation made by a group of victims during the ongoing collective negotiations between the two sides.

The group of legal counselors representing the victims has estimated the potential damages to be at least 120 billion yen, based on the church's internal documents showing the annual amounts of donations it received.

If the number of followers leaving the church increases, the amount the church has proposed could turn out to be far smaller than actually needed. Furthermore, there is no current legal framework for the church to make such public deposits of funds.

The church's maneuver seems to be an attempt to thwart the Diet’s move to consider legal measures to prevent the outflow of church assets, which should be used to pay compensation. But it may have inadvertently underscored the urgency for such legislation.

Meanwhile, the government's response has been alarmingly lethargic because its actions are based on the principle that recovery of damages is possible through civil procedures for creditor protection.

However, it will take a long time to legally verify in detail the damages that have been incurred over many years and there is an undeniable risk of assets being dissipated during the process. Additionally, the costs of these procedures are substantial.

While giving due consideration to the property rights and freedom of activities of religious organizations, the legislature should act swiftly to enact legislation to address these concerns.

--The Asahi Shimbun, Nov. 9