Japan: Lawyers, Deprogramming, and the Unification Church Dissolution Case. 5. Testimonies in Court

The leading anti-cult lawyers acknowledged during cross-examination that they referred parents to deprogrammers.

By Patricia Duval

June 16, 2025

Lawyer Hiroshi Yamaguchi at a press conference following the first-degree verdict ordering the dissolution of the Unification Church. Screenshot.

On June 15, 2015, in one of the tort cases on which the government relied to request dissolution of the Church, lawyer Hiroshi Yamaguchi was called to testify against the Unification Church in a case filed by a former member at the Tokyo District Court. 

In this case, the plaintiff graduated from a prestigious university and was on the path to becoming an elite executive in a top company. She met the Unification Church and embraced the faith in 2001. After nine years in the Church, in December 2010, when she returned to her parents’ home, she was abducted and confined by relatives and subjected to deprogramming, leading to her withdrawal from the Church. 

The plaintiff called lawyer Yamaguchi to testify about the Church’s alleged illegal activities. The Church lawyer, Nobuya Fukumoto, then cross-examined him. Lawyer Fukumoto asked him about NNLSS’ referral of parents to deprogrammers to handle their children. 

He stated the following: 

Q: So, back in 2000, you had already started referring people to Miyamura [deprogrammer], hadn’t you?

A: In cases from within the Tokyo metropolitan area, for example, where a husband would say, “My wife is involved in the Unification Church—what should I do?” my basic approach was to refer them to a pastor from the United Church of Christ in Japan. However, there were cases where those pastors were too busy and unable to respond. In such situations, I would say something like, “Well then, here are a few other candidates. If necessary, you might try calling one of them.” In that context, I did include Miyamura on the list as one of several possible options.

Therefore, the leading figure of NNLSS, lawyer Yamaguchi, admitted in Court that the Network had been referring parents of Unification Church believers for years to pastors specialized in the “rescue” from the Unification Church. 

Lawyer Nobuya Fukumoto.

They very well knew that this “rescue” by pastors entailed confinement and forced persuasion, and that the believers would not be released until they would accept to recant their faith. 

This is evidenced by a hearing in 1996, in a civil suit for tort at the Kobe District Court, where a deprogrammer, Pastor Takazawa, gave unequivocal testimony on the methods used for “rescue” by those pastors nationwide. 

In that case, which ended with a final ruling of the court on 4 October 2001, there were three plaintiffs represented by thirty-six lawyers of NNLSS to claim damages, including Masaki Yoshii, a prominent NNLSS lawyer in Kobe. 

Lawyer Hiroshi Yamaguchi, the leading lawyer of the NNLSS, whose office was in Tokyo, joined the litigation, being appointed by attorney Yoshii. 

The plaintiffs’ deprogrammer, Pastor Mamoru Takazawa, was cross-examined during the proceedings and testified that confinement was broadly used by the pastors involved in “rescue” activities in Japan: “Q: When did you start using physical restraint? A: As I mentioned earlier, I believe it was around ten years ago. However, it wasn’t just me; it was generally a unified practice among pastors involved in rescue activities nationwide” [Minutes of Court hearing, May 21, 1996, pp. 25–26].

When asked about the illegality of such practices, he confirmed that he was aware of it but justified them with the same argument as was used by NNLSS in the Habeas Corpus case above. He stated that kidnapping and confinement of adult believers were not illegal, as they were a form of “protection” by parents: “Q: Are you aware that the defendant Unification Church criticized your rescue activities as kidnapping and confinement? A: Yes, I am aware of that. Q: What are your thoughts about such criticisms? A: Because the parents are involved, it is not kidnapping or confinement and should be considered protection.”

When the defense lawyer asked him about the necessity of such “protection,” he bluntly stated that coercion was necessary to have believers recant their faith: “Q: Are there any people who leave the Unification Church on their own without undergoing rescue activities? A: Once someone has firmly embraced the Unification Church’s beliefs, I believe it is impossible for them to leave naturally” [Minutes of Court hearing, March 26, 1996, pp. 80–2].

And concretely, he confirmed that the parents could not release their children until the deprogrammer gave them the green light: “Q: If the parents release their child, that would be a problem for you, right? “A: It would be, as the discussions would end without any resolution” [Minutes of Court hearing, May 21, 1996, pp. 29–31].

Yamaguchi (left) with Masaki Kito (right), another prominent NNLSS lawyer. Screenshot.

Lawyer Yamaguchi, a leading figure of NNLSS and part of the legal team representing the plaintiffs in that case, could not ignore the facts in the deprogrammer’s testimony. The justification from NNLSS lawyers that they did not know is a tragic farce. 

Since NNLSS’ inception in 1987, all the parent referrals by NNLSS lawyers to pastors for decades were made with total knowledge of the methods used against the Unification Church believers concerned. 

Parents were sent to those pastors precisely because of the coercive methods they used—as the believers would not leave the Church naturally, as explained by the deprogrammer in court. 

This was the whole strategy of NNLSS to fabricate apostates who would then file cases against the Church, to eventually obtain its dissolution. 

This is further evidenced through NNLSS’ direct intervention to alert parents of Church believers, who had not complained of anything, and incite them to use the “rescue” activities of the deprogrammers. 

Source: bitterwinter.org