Supreme Court Decision

On October 2^nd, the Japanese Supreme Court issued its judgement in the case over the disputed presidency of Jinja Honchō. The court decided that the plaintiff (Revd Ashihara, who wanted the courts to confirm that he was the president of Jinja Honchō) could not appeal to the Supreme Court, because the grounds of his appeal did not meet the conditions for such an appeal in a civil case. Strictly speaking, then, they said nothing about the content of the case, but the decision means that the judgement of the lower court stands.

To recap, for people who are just joining us, in May 2022, the election of a new president of Jinja Honchō went badly wrong. The Board of Directors took a vote and elected Revd Tanaka, and then the chairman appointed Revd Ashihara. This was not how things were supposed to work. The management of Jinja Honchō got an emergency injunction saying that Revd Ashihara was not the president, and he sued. The point in dispute was the meaning of the regulations, which say that the chairman appoints a member of the board as president after the board has discussed the issue: does that mean that the board has to vote for the person who will be appointed?

The courts decided that yes, it did mean that. The chairman cannot appoint someone without a majority vote of the board for that candidate. This is now final.

So, what does it mean?

It means that Revd Ashihara is not president of Jinja Honchō. However, it does not mean that Revd Tanaka is the president, because he has not been appointed by the chairman. In practice, this decision changes nothing.

So, what now?

The Tanaka faction (I need a name for them, since both sides claim to be Jinja Honchō) held a press conference, and called on the chairman to abide by the court ruling. The problem with that is that the court did not make any ruling on what the chairman should do, as far as I can see. The lower court ruled that someone only became president when appointed by the chairman on the basis of a resolution passed by the board. It did not, at least not in the part of the ruling quoted, rule that the chairman was legally obliged to appoint the person that the board voted for, and it is quite possible that he is not. It is not unreasonable for the regulations to require agreement between the board and the chairman on the president, after all.

The chairman has made it entirely clear that he will not appoint Revd Tanaka. In theory, the Tanaka faction could take him to court in an effort to compel him to do so, but I do not expect that to happen. Fist, the current presidential term ends next May, and it is unlikely that they could get a judgement much in advance of that — and if there was an appeal, it would definitely be heard after that. Second, the whole point of several regulations is to shield the chairman from any sort of legal responsibility — it is supposed to be a purely honorary position, for a scion of the Imperial family or old nobility. (The current chairman is descended from the Fujiwara.) If the Tanaka faction did try to sue him, I think that would split Jinja Honchō.

I think Jinja Honchō will continue as it is now until the May meeting of the Oversight Council. As you can tell from my posts, this dispute has had little impact on day-to-day operations, and so this is a viable option.

Then, in May, a new board will be elected, a new chairman may be elected, and a new president will be chosen. I expect them to be able to paper over the cracks at that point, and go through all the necessary motions. (I have no idea who will end up as the president, however.)

And then the hard work of healing all the divisions and bringing the Shinto community back together will begin.