Illigal Distribution of Defamatory Materials

The Justice Chronicle, provided by Soka Gakkai International-USA, is a free monthly e-mail in support of the Soka Spirit movement. Soka Spirit is the SGI's educational effort to create value and deepen our understanding of Nichiren Buddhism through increased awareness of issues surrounding the Nichiren Shoshu priesthood and the spiritual foundation of the SGI movement.

COURT ORDERS NICHIREN SHOSHU TO PAY DAMAGES FOR ILLEGAL DISTRIBUTION OF DEFAMATORY MATERIALS

On Feb. 26, the Tokyo District Court a reached a verdict in a lawsuit brought by the Soka Gakkai against Nichiren Shoshu (Chief Executive, Nikken Abe) and two Nichiren Shoshu believers, Kazuo Okusa and Shuichi Sanuki. In that lawsuit, the Soka Gakkai had sought restitution for damages incurred from an incident in which a group, directed by Nichiren Shoshu high priest Nikken Abe, distributed massive numbers of a libelous leaflet in Tokyo. Judge Toshiaki Iimura recognized the Soka Gakkai¡s claims as valid, ordering the priesthood, Okusa and Sanuki to pay damages, and Sanuki to discontinue distribution of the leaflets and dispose of those remaining.

One of the defendants, Okusa, is head of the group ÀMyokanko,” a body of Nichiren Shoshu lay members associated with the Rikyo-bo lodging temple on the grounds of the head temple Taiseki-ji, while Sanuki is a member of the same group.

According to the verdict, Sanuki produced leaflets that were defamatory to the Soka Gakkai, using photographs printed in the Gakkai¡s periodical Seikyo Graphic without permission, altering them in a malicious manner and distributing them through a group named ÀThe Society To Protect Religion and Ideology” around May 2001.

In June of the same year, the Soka Gakkai filed a lawsuit with the Tokyo District Court seeking restitution for damages and a court order banning distribution of these leaflets on grounds that they violated copyright.
In response to the priesthood¡s insistence that the use of these photographs constituted Àfair use” and thus did not require permission, the verdict pointed out that the purpose of these leaflets was malicious misrepresentation, denouncing the defense¡s position on the grounds that Àit is incomprehensible that such usage is within what is commonly accepted as reasonable bounds, and it is also incomprehensible that using photographs in this manner is in accordance with fair practices.” It was acknowledgement that Sanuki¡s producing these leaflets constituted an act of Àviolation of copyright” and Àviolation of the personal rights of an author.”

In referring to Okusa¡s legal liability, the ruling then focused on the fact that the time period in which the leaflets were produced and distributed immediately preceded the Tokyo Assembly elections held that June and the House of Councilors elections held that July. In response to Okusa¡s denial that he had any knowledge of the political purpose of the timing of the leaflets, or of the details of their contents, the judge ruled that Àthe defendant Okusa was fully aware of the timing of the events” and Àit is natural to conclude that he was aware of the details of the printed content of the leaflets.” Regarding Okusa¡s providing the Myokanko headquarters as a place to keep the leaflets, the verdict concludes that this fact Àestablishes that this was a collaborative illegal effort in which [Okusa] aided and abetted the defendant Sanuki in committing a violation in violating the personal rights of the author.”

Moreover, regarding the liability of the priesthood, the verdict examined the close alliance between Nichiren Shoshu chief executive Nikken and the Myokanko. For instance, much importance was attached to the fact that Nikken had praised a Nichiren Shoshu-related publication produced by Myokanko containing virtually the same false propaganda as the leaflets in question, aggressively promoted among his priests mass subscriptions to this publication and contributed his own articles to it. The court recognized that Àthe production and distribution of these leaflets appear to be intimately related to the activities of the defendant Nichiren Shoshu, and it would be appropriate to conclude that these actions were executed by the defendant, Nichiren Shoshu,” and Àconcerning Okusa¡s conduct, which is intimately connected to the activities of the defendant Nichiren Shoshu, it is apparent that he obeys the direction and supervision of the defendant Nichiren Shoshu,” thus ruling that the Nichiren Shoshu priesthood is also liable as Okusa¡s «employer¡.”

In short, Nikken¡s own words served as incontestable evidence of the priesthood¡s involvement, leading to the ruling against them.

Myokanko has conspired with Nikken in the past to malign the Soka Gakkai, and has maintained very close ties with Masatomo Yamazaki, a key player in numerous fraudulent schemes. Yamazaki currently has more than 10 lawsuits pending against him, and Sanuki has been observed following him around, almost behaving as if he was Yamazaki¡s personal assistant.

The Myokanko has repeatedly engaged in questionable tactics as an operative for the priesthood each time there has been an election, ending in repeated blunders. During the 2001 House of Councilors elections, they were able to gain campaign support from former representative Katsuhiko Shirakawa¡s newly formed political party for two Myokanko members who were running for office. Nikken himself strenuously supported the candidates, who, only attracting little more than 10,000 votes, ended in defeat.

In addition, a many priests and Myokanko members in various regions of Japan have been sued for damages over an incident in which false propaganda leaflets were persistently distributed immediately preceding the 2000 general elections.

On Feb. 12, the Tokyo Superior Court held Nikken responsible for libel, ruling against him and Nichiren Shoshu in their appeal of a lower court ruling and ordering them to pay restitution. That trial had been over their distribution of false information stemming from litigation over the ÀSeattle Incident.” [The ÀSeattle Incident” case began with Mrs. Hiroe Clow¡s account of Nikken Abe¡s altercation with prostitutes in 1963, which she revealed in the June 17, 1992 issue of the Soka Shimpo. Nichiren Shoshu sued the Soka Gakkai for libel, but by Jan. 2002, all charges were withdrawn.]

************************************

Comments by Soka Gakkai attorney Yoshiyuki Toyohama

Upon concluding that the photographs taken by Seikyo Shimbun newspaper were protected by copyright, this verdict clearly concludes that Sanuki, who misused the photographs in question to produce defamatory leaflets, is indeed liable for violating that copyright, and that Okusa, the head of Myokanko, was involved. This conclusion is based on the fact that large numbers of Myokanko members distributed these leaflets and that Myokanko is therefore liable for this illegal activity. Moreover, the court recognized that Nichiren Shoshu is also liable in that it was in a position to direct and supervise Okusa. Based on these facts, this verdict is just and deserved.

At the trial, Okusa denied any involvement and pleaded complete ignorance of the fact that a large number of leaflets were sent to the Myokanko headquarters, and furthermore claimed not to know what the contents of the leaflets were. However, the court saw through this and ruled that Okusa was indeed aware of the contents of the leaflets, a fact which Àestablished that this was a collaborative illegal act in which he [Okusa] aided and abetted the defendant Sanuki in committing a violation of copyright as well as violating the personal rights of the author.”

Upon recognizing from the contents of Nikken¡s statements that attacks against the Soka Gakkai are being conducted as an activity of Nichiren Shoshu, the verdict held Nichiren Shoshu liable for damages as Okusa¡s employer, as Nichiren Shoshu was in the position of directing and supervising Okusa, and also held that Okusa¡s conduct was Àundertaken to carry out a work project of Nichiren Shoshu.”

In the past, Sanuki and others have produced and distributed leaflets defamatory to the Soka Gakkai during times of national elections, but I think this verdict is especially appropriate in that the judgment passed was strict in establishing that Myokanko had planned the acts and responsibility extended all the way to Nichiren Shoshu.

This article appeared in the Seikyo Shimbun, Feb. 27, 2003