This study examines the legal structure of religious control in modern Imperial Japan by comparing the rules and regulations governing proselytization enacted in both mainland Japan and its colonies. In Japan, following repeated failures to enact a Re...
This study examines the legal structure of religious control in modern Imperial Japan by comparing the rules and regulations governing proselytization enacted in both mainland Japan and its colonies. In Japan, following repeated failures to enact a Religious Organizations Law, religious activities were regulated through lower-level administrative ordinances issued by the Ministry of the Interior and the Ministry of Education. In contrast, the colonies developed distinct legal systems that did not simply transplant these metropolitan norms but rather adapted them to local political and religious conditions. Notably, the Government-General of Korea, the Karafuto Agency, and the South Seas Bureau adopted the 1915 “Regulations on Missionary Work” as a common legal framework, displaying similar structures despite differences such as the presence or absence of the concept of “pseudo-religious organizations.” On the other hand, Taiwan, the Kwantung Leased Territory, and Manchukuo built their systems primarily on Taiwan’s earlier temple regulations, focusing on spatial control and public security. Among them, Korea institutionalized a legal distinction between “recognized religions” and “pseudo-religious organizations,” thereby reinforcing control over indigenous religious movements—a framework that later influenced religious policy in Manchukuo and even in mainland Japan. Through this comparative analysis, the study argues that Imperial Japan’s legal regulation of religion was not a uniform imperial code but rather a differentiated system of control shaped by the specific strategic needs of each colonial territory.