Former president Tanaka Tomihiro argues that the Tokyo High Court ruling contains a logical contradiction at its core, and that the liquidation process may push victim redress further out of reach.
Weeks after the Tokyo High Court upheld the dissolution order against the Family Federation for World Peace and Unification (formerly the Unification Church), former president Tanaka Tomihiro is raising pointed questions about the ruling's logic and the effectiveness of the liquidation process now underway.
Tanaka served as the organization's 14th president from 2020 until his resignation in December 2025, leading the organization through the turbulent period following the 2022 assassination of former Prime Minister Abe Shinzo. Speaking on the YouTube channel "No Filter: Tanaka Tomihiro on the Family Federation," Tanaka outlined what he described as logical contradictions in the High Court ruling and structural problems with the liquidation process.
A Shift in the Ruling's Stated Purpose
The Tokyo District Court ordered dissolution on the grounds that the organization's donation solicitation practices caused damage on an "unprecedented scale," and the High Court upheld that finding. However, when the ruling turned to justifying why dissolution was the necessary remedy, it shifted direction.
According to Tanaka, the High Court ruling framed the dissolution order's purpose as "preventing future harm," and did not position the recovery of past damages as its primary objective.
The Family Federation had argued before the High Court that if victim redress were the goal, dissolution would be counterproductive. The High Court's ruling effectively set that argument aside. "The entire framework of the debate shifted completely," Tanaka said.
The Contradiction Between "Preventing Future Harm" and Reconstitution
The contradiction Tanaka identified sits inside this "future harm prevention" rationale.
The same ruling states that dismissed employees could find employment in a reconstituted religious body. The court itself acknowledged that the organization's activities could continue under a different legal form even without corporate registration.
Tanaka posed the question directly: the court claims dissolution is necessary to prevent future harm, while simultaneously assuming the organization will form a new entity and continue operating. If reconstitution is a given, dissolution cannot prevent future harm. "This is a clear contradiction. The logic of the dissolution rationale has collapsed," Tanaka said. He added that as long as the organization holds corporate status, government authorities can monitor its conduct, but once dissolved, that oversight mechanism disappears as well.
Structural Problems That Push Victim Redress Further Away
Beyond his legal critique, Tanaka identified three practical problems that he argued would make financial redress for former donors harder to achieve under the liquidation process.
First, there is the problem of verifying claims.
The liquidator announced that it would begin accepting refund claims on May 20. On the same date, termination notices were issued to all staff. The day the process begins accepting claims from those alleging harm is the same day the people capable of verifying those claims cease to exist within the organization.
The majority of refund requests concern donations made ten or twenty years ago, and verification has historically relied on tracing the recollections of the staff members and local leaders who were involved at the time. That institutional capacity vanishes just as the claims process opens.
"The liquidator will have no choice but to accept each claimant's account at face value," Tanaka said.
Second, there is the dismantling of the compensation committee.
The March 2025 Tokyo District Court ruling anticipated that additional people would come forward with claims. In response, three attorneys, Mizokami, Matsukuma, and Sugiyama, volunteered to establish an independent compensation committee to handle future claims.
The committee was run by outside attorneys with no ties to the organization. When it needed to verify the details of an individual application, it would consult the Family Federation, investigate the facts, and then determine the refund amount.
It had already been processing payments. After the High Court ruling, however, the liquidator dissolved the committee and brought its deposited funds under the liquidator's control.
"The compensation system that these lawyers built in good faith was destroyed," Tanaka said.
Third, there is the question of asset liquidity.
Media reports have estimated the organization's total assets at roughly 100 billion yen. The liquidator has confirmed securing at least 40 billion yen in deposits by freezing the organization's accounts, with the remainder consisting largely of real estate. Once those cash reserves are exhausted, the liquidator will have to rely on selling properties.
"I find it hard to believe the facilities the organization used can be sold quickly," Tanaka said.
Expenses for liquidation representatives and accounting firms continue to draw from the same asset pool, and the funds available for refunds will "shrink faster than expected," he added.
What Comes Next
Major media outlets reported the High Court ruling as a step toward victim redress, but none examined the logical inconsistency Tanaka identified: a ruling that simultaneously premises its rationale on preventing future harm and on the organization's reconstitution.
The Family Federation filed a special appeal to the Supreme Court on March 9, 2026, though the appeal does not halt liquidation proceedings. The claims submission period runs for one year. How much of the organization's asset base will remain liquid by the time that window closes, and how the liquidator will verify claims stretching back decades without the institutional memory the organization once maintained, remain open questions.
As long as the dissolution order is advanced in the name of "victim redress," whether the process actually delivers relief to those it claims to protect is a question that the liquidation itself will have to answer.