On July 11, 1996, the JCLU released a statement opposing to a request of dissolution of the Aum Supreme Truth (Aum), filed by the Public Security Investigation Agency (PSIA) under the Subversive Activities Prevention Act (SAPA). The SAPA had been under strong opposition since its very enactment in 1952. The JCLU also took part in the protest movement because the Act would violate fundamental human rights guaranteed under the Constitution.

The SAPA had been applied only few sporadic occasions to the individual and is almost extinct in substance. For the first time in 40 years, its organizational application, the Act's original target is about to become a reality.

The announcement by the PSIA for probe was made in the public gazette of December 20, 1995, followed by six explanatory sessions which were terminated abruptly. Soon after on July 11, 1996, the PSIA issued a request to dissolve the Aum. Along with this expeditated movement by the PSIA, the JCLU held a public monthly lecture on July 6 on the actual proceedings of explanatory procedures, and problems of the SAPA. Speakers were Attorney Takashi Naito, who represents the Aum, Masaaki Fukuda, professor of Hitotsubashi University and official watchman at the explanatory session, and Hitoshi Serizawa, professor of Aoyama Gakuin University.

Attorney Naito presented investigators' record of Aum members' oral statement. The record provides neither the names nor addresses of the deponents, and many portions of the statements were deleted. For a regular lawsuit, this document would fail to meet the average requirement of the court.

Professor Fukuda held the Aum incidents as an issue over power and individual dignity which reflects the postwar Japanese society. He suggested that particular attention and consideration are due for individual followers of the Aum.

Regarding the SAPA, professor Serizawa pointed out that the dissolution request does not meet any conditions required under the SAPA. "Application of the Act under such incomplete condition would signify that Japan has fallen as an outlaw nation."

Due to lack of information, the JCLU did not issue a statement on problems concerning police search of the Aum. Regarding the organizational application of the SAPA, however, necessity for an opposition statement was strongly shared. The statement was released following the discussions at the public monthly lecture. The JCLU also co-sponsored an Anti-SAPA Meeting held on July 19.

A decision by the Public Security Commission is expected shortly. Meanwhile, further actions by the JCLU must be considered.

July 11, 1996
Japan Civil Liberties Union

The Director-General of the Public Security Investigation Agency (PSIA) filed a disposition request today to the Public Security Commission (PSC) to designate the Aum Supreme Truth (Aum) for dissolution. The request was filed after six explanatory sessions provided under the Subversive Activities Prevention Act (SAPA).

The PSIA terminated the explanatory session one-sidedly, ignoring the Aum's belief that explanation has not been made enough. This authoritarian conduct by the PSIA is the very embodiment of the intrinsic nature of the SAPA. The JCLU stands in strong opposition to the requested organizational application of the SAPA for the following reasons:

First, an organizational application of the SAPA would bring about the destruction of Constitutional order. It violates essential fundamental human rights of various fields as guaranteed by the Constitution, such as freedom of expression, freedom of association, freedom of religion, and due process. Should the Aum be designated for dissolution, not only "any activities" conducted by the Aum members for the Aum would be targeted for criminal punishment, but activities of non-member citizens could also be widely held punishable by employing accomplice provisions under the Penal Code. It signifies the destruction of the principle of legality of crimes and punishment in Japanese society. Moreover, it indicates the creation of a society in which every citizen's daily speech and activities, irrespective of being an Aum member or not, are held under surveillance of the public security police. In addition, it is easily imaginable that such conditions would enormously affect and impair lawyers' and media reporters' free activities. The postwar Japanese society has constantly developed civil liberties and rights under the Constitution. They are now faced by unprecedented danger.

Next, evidence submitted by the PSIA at the explanatory sessions are tremendously slipshod and hardly satisfies the requirements of the SAPA. Many of them are "reports" produced by public security officers, which they present as the compilation of oral statements of (former) Aum members. The "reports" do not indicate who made the statements when, and under what circumstances. Likewise, "written statements" of the (former) members neither clarify who, when and under what circumstances it was made. Since the designation procedure for dissolution implicates gross human rights violations as mentioned above, the evidence must be accompanied by corresponding strictness. The review procedure of the PSC, which examines the PSIA's request, is also problematic. Its procedure is limited to the document review in principle, and other aspects as well do not meet the minimum procedural protection provided in the Administrative Procedure Law.

Furthermore, it must be pointed out that the present Aum is incomparably weakened and exhausted than ever before. This is due to criminal procedures charged on its executives, bankruptcy procedures, and an dissolution order by the Religious Juridical Persons Law. Dissolution of such organization by the SAPA would only cause unrestorable violation of civil liberties.

Due to the forementioned reasons, the JCLU declaims against the PSIA's request, and demands that the PSC reject the request in respect of the Constitutional ideal of human rights protection, and in sensible consideration of the present status of the Aum.

Editor's note: The request was rejected by the PSC on January 31, 1997.