Priast Guilty of Defamation

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.

NICHIREN SHOSHU CHIEF ADMINISTRATOR LOSES LIBEL APPEAL, FINED

On July 15, the Japanese Supreme Court upheld two previous lower court rulings that found Nichiren Shoshu Chief Administrator Nikken Abe accountable for libel, and ordered him to pay damages.

In 1992, Reformist priest Rev. Takudo Ikeda sued Nikken Abe for comments made at a gathering of some 400 priests accusing Rev. Ikeda of having accepted money from the Soka Gakkai to secede from the Nichiren Shoshu priesthood. It was also stated that Rev. Ikeda was to use part of these funds to bribe other priests.

The Otsu District Court ruled in favor of Rev. Ikeda in January 1998, while the Osaka High Court rejected an appeal from Nikken Abe in December 2000. With the Supreme Court’s final decision, again in favor of Rev. Ikeda, the case is now closed.

HIGH COURT FINDS NICHIREN SHOSHU PRIEST GUILTY OF DEFAMATION

On July 23, Tomohide Chikayama, chief priest of Nichiren Shoshu’s Byodo-ji Temple in Kishiwada City, Osaka, and two lay believers decided not appeal a verdict upheld by the Osaka High Court finding them guilty of willful defamation against the New Komeito party.

New Komeito filed suit against the three defendants in 2000, after they distributed leaflets in Kishiwada alleging that the party and Soka Gakkai had conspired to ruin the reputation of Katsuhiko Shirakawa, a former Liberal Democratic Party lawmaker, because he has been a strident critic of New Komeito-Soka Gakkai ties. A lower court trial ruled that Chikayama gave a false testimony about his knowledge of the leaflets that were being circulated just prior to a House of Representative election, an act that was found to be deliberately malicious.

On July 9, the higher court rejected the plaintiff’s appeal that they were exercising their rights guaranteed in the article 21 of the Japanese Constitution, upholding the lower court decision ordering the plaintiffs to pay damages.