Freedom of religion is a fundamental right guaranteed by the constitutions of many democratic nations. In principle, the state does not interfere with individuals' beliefs or doctrines. However, when that freedom is exploited to cause organized harm to others, the state must no longer remain a passive observer. The name of religion should not serve as a license for wrongdoing.
The power of religion is immense. Many individuals are willing to risk their lives for their beliefs. When used for noble purposes, religion can unite communities and assist those in need, playing a positive role in society. However, when it serves the private interests of specific individuals or groups, it can inflict significant damage on the state and society. Thus, the freedom of religion comes with substantial social responsibilities.
Recent incidents in Japan and South Korea illustrate the problems that arise when religious organizations neglect these responsibilities. The Japanese Supreme Court recently upheld a dissolution order against the Unification Church, also known as the Family Federation for World Peace and Unification. The unanimous decision by all four judges was based on findings that the church had systematically coerced over 1,500 individuals into making large donations, resulting in financial losses totaling 20.4 billion yen (approximately $194.8 million) from 1973 to 2022.
The church argued that the dissolution order infringed upon religious freedom and the right to assemble. However, the Supreme Court was firm in its stance, stating that the order does not prohibit individual religious practices and that revoking the church's legal status was a necessary measure to protect victims and uphold the public interest. The court clarified that while religious freedom is respected, illegal activities conducted under the guise of religion cannot be protected.
A similar controversy is unfolding in South Korea. Lee Man-hee, the leader of the Shincheonji Church of Jesus, has been arrested on charges of systematically enrolling over 50,000 followers into the ruling People Power Party. While the final verdict on his guilt or innocence will be determined through trial, if the allegations of coercive enrollment are true, it would constitute an act beyond the scope of religious activity. Mobilizing followers to join a specific political party for the church's benefit poses a threat to the constitutional principle of separation of church and state and the democratic order.
Moreover, the controversies surrounding Shincheonji extend beyond the current allegations of collusion with political entities. There have been persistent claims of material and psychological harm caused by the church's deceptive proselytizing and evangelism practices, leading to the formation of groups advocating for victims who have experienced family breakdowns, severed relationships, and financial losses. During the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, the church was linked to a significant outbreak that severely impacted national health measures. In fact, these issues are not limited to Shincheonji; numerous cults and similar religious organizations have proliferated, causing social conflict and harm under the banner of 'freedom of religion.'
The problem lies in the state's excessive leniency towards these phenomena. The government has been wary of potential accusations of religious persecution, while political circles have been reluctant to address these issues for fear of losing votes from religious groups. As a result, the suffering of victims has often been neglected for years, sometimes even decades. This context prompted President Lee Jae-myung to meet with key religious leaders earlier this year to explore the harms of cults and heretical religions and discuss possible responses.
The state’s duty is to protect its citizens, not specific religious organizations. While freedom of religion is a valuable right enshrined in the constitution, it cannot justify illegal actions or harm to others. Religious freedom is the freedom to believe, not the freedom to harm. As long as religion remains within the bounds of the law, the state must guarantee that freedom; however, the moment it crosses that line, the state must hold it accountable with utmost rigor. This is the true path to safeguarding religious freedom and fulfilling the state's obligation to protect its citizens.
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.