* Category includes ratification, accession, or succession to the treaty

The Constitution of Japan was adopted in November 1946 and came into effect in May 1947. The constitutional framework governing civil society in Japan is firmly rooted in the guarantee of fundamental rights, particularly those necessary for collective action and public discourse. These freedoms are primarily enshrined in Chapter III: Rights and Duties of the People of the Constitution of Japan.

The following provision directly protects and guides civil society activities, including those of associations, foundations, and NPOs:

Article 21: Freedom of assembly and association as well as speech, press and all other forms of expression are guaranteed. No censorship shall be maintained, nor shall the secrecy of any means of communication be violated.

A key limitation on all fundamental rights in the Japanese Constitution, including those related to civil society, is the concept of “Public Welfare”:

Article 12: The freedoms and rights guaranteed to the people by this Constitution shall be maintained by the constant endeavor of the people, who shall refrain from any abuse of these freedoms and rights and shall always be responsible for utilizing them for the public welfare.

Article 13: All of the people shall be respected as individuals. Their right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness shall, to the extent that it does not interfere with the public welfare, be the supreme consideration in legislation and in other governmental affairs.

Relevant national laws and regulations affecting civil society include the following:

• Act No. 7 of 1998 on Promotion of Specified Non-Profit Activities (NPO Act), as amended by Act No. 128 of 2003 regarding administrative dispositions by competent authorities and improved access to business reports
• Act No. 57 of 2003 on the Protection of Personal Information (APPI) (amended multiple times including in 2015, 2020, and 2022), increasing compliance obligations for organizations handling personal data, including NPOs
• Act No. 122 of 2004 on the Protection of Whistleblowers (Whistleblower Protection Act, amended by Act No. 51 of 2020 and subsequent revisions effective in 2022 and 2025)
• Act No. 50 of 2006 revising provisions regarding methods of public notice
• Act No. 49 of 2006 on the authorization of Public Interest Incorporated Associations and Public Interest Incorporated Foundations
• Act No. 70 of 2008 on the Certified NPO (non-profit organization) System (amended in 2011 to introduce the Public Support Test, and entered into force on April 1, 2012)
• Act No. 108 of 2013 on the Protection of Specially Designated Secrets (State Secrets Protection Act), regulating the handling and disclosure of classified information and imposing criminal penalties for unauthorized disclosure
• Act No. 70 of 2016 on enhanced information disclosure and simplified administrative procedures Act No. 50 of 2021 on administrative jurisdiction and clarifying electronic submission procedures

1. A general election was held on February 8, 2026, which resulted in LDP securing a significant majority of seats. In a coalition agreement signed with Nippon Ishin (Japan Innovation Party) in October 2025, the LDP included a commitment to “commence deliberations regarding intelligence and anti-espionage legislation (including a basic law, a Foreign Agents Registration Act, and a Lobbying Disclosure Act), and to promptly draft and pass these bills.” Therefore, following the results of the general election, the government now intends to establish an expert panel as early as the summer to discuss an “Anti-Espionage Act” targeting foreign agencies. Based on these expert discussions, the government aims to submit relevant bills during the extraordinary Diet session in the fall of 2026 or later.

This legislative development would fulfill the campaign pledge made by both the LDP and Nippon Ishin during the general election. With their ruling coalition now holding a majority of seats in the House of Representatives, NPOs believe there is an urgent need to gather information regarding the potential impact of these laws on civil society. Concerns exist that under the pretext of detecting spies and gathering intelligence, citizens’ privacy may be infringed upon and the freedoms of expression and the press may be restricted if such legislation is passed.

It should also be noted that some opposition parties have also submitted bills related to anti-espionage measures and intelligence capacity development. However, these lapsed following the dissolution of the House of Representatives in January 2026. As of April 2026, the ruling coalition appears to still be advocating for enhanced intelligence-gathering capacity in response to evolving security threats, while opposition parties continue to call for amendments to safeguard civil liberties amidst concerns over potential privacy violations. In particular, the Center-Reform Coalition, Japan’s largest opposition party, is requesting amendments to protect personal information and privacy, as well as political neutrality. Additionally, the Democratic Party for the People, Japan’s second largest opposition party, submitted its own bill in March 2026 to strengthen counter-espionage measures, further intensifying the debate.

2. A bill is also under consideration that would require the registration of “foreign agents” that conduct lobbying or public relations activities within Japan. This would make influence operations more visible to the public.

We are unaware of any other pending legislative/regulatory initiatives affecting NGOs. Please help keep us informed; if you are aware of pending initiatives, write to ICNL at ngomonitor@icnl.org.

Multiple organizational forms are available to individuals seeking to establish a CSO. These include general incorporated associations and foundations, public interest incorporated associations and foundations, and non-profit organizations:

A General Incorporated Association (GIA) is an organization that is registered under the Act on General Incorporated Associations and General Incorporated Foundations (Act No. 48 of 2006). A GIA is an entity that confers legal personality upon a group of people. Unlike a limited company, which operates for profit, a key characteristic of GIAs is that any profits they generate cannot be distributed to their members (associates). GIAs may engage in revenue-generating activities if they do not interfere with organizations’ non-profit objectives. Unlike PIIAs (see below), GIAs do not have nationwide exclusive rights to their corporate name. Multiple GIAs may legally use identical or very similar names as long as they are registered in different locations.

A General Incorporated Foundation (GIF) is a non-profit organization established solely through registration, based on specific assets (worth at least ¥3 million, or USD 20,000 as of December 2025), which maintains and manages those assets for public benefit or mutual benefit purposes. GIFs face few restrictions on their activities and may transition to Public Interest Incorporated Foundations (PIIFs) upon receiving public interest certification.

A Public Interest Incorporated Association (PIIA) is a legal entity that operates for the benefit of an unspecified number of persons and has received “public interest certification” from the Prime Minister or a prefectural governor. To transition from a General Incorporated Association to a Public Interest Incorporated Association, one must first establish a GIA. Subsequently, the relevant authority must certify that the applicant meets the requirements of the law, including that its public interest activities are its primary purpose and that it adheres to relevant governance rules. Certification confers exclusive rights to the corporate name and tax incentives for donors, and helps to establish institutional legitimacy in the eyes of the public. However, certification also restricts the association’s ability to introduce business activities, and demands greater transparency and accountability in operations. Profits are not distributed to members but are reinvested into the organization’s activities.

A Public Interest Incorporated Foundation (PIIF) is a private non-profit organization established to conduct activities of significant public benefit (such as education, culture, welfare, and healthcare), having received ‘public interest certification’ from the Cabinet Office or a prefectural governor. After being established as a General Incorporated Foundation, PIIFs undergo rigorous scrutiny to obtain this certification, thereby gaining benefits such as tax incentives and institutional standing among authorities and the public. However, PIIFs are obligated to report activities to administrative authorities and often face increased complexity in accounting procedures.

A Non-Profit Organization (NPO) acquires legal personality under the Act on the Promotion of Specified Nonprofit Activities, which was passed by the Diet (Japanese Parliament) and enacted in 1998. NPOs engage in nonprofit activities contributing to the benefit of the general public in specific fields such as healthcare, welfare, social education, and community development. Acquiring legal personality enables NPOs to enter into contracts and register under their own names, enhancing credibility. Establishment requires certification by a competent authority (such as the prefectural governor) and registration. Profits are not distributed to members but are reinvested into the organization’s activities. The number of registered NPOs in Japan has increased over time, reaching a high of 51,871 in 2017. The number has since decreased to 49,319 as of June 2025. Registered NPOs tend to be concentrated in large cities, such as Tokyo, Yokohama, Osaka, and Nagoya.

Under the Act on the Promotion of Specified Nonprofit Activities, an NPO must demonstrate that it provides a public benefit in order to obtain legal personality. Namely, the NPO must pursue one or more of the “specified nonprofit activities,” listed in a schedule to the law:

• Promotion of health, medical treatment, or welfare;
• Promotion of social education;
• Promotion of community development;
• Promotion of science, culture, the arts, or sports;
• Conservation of the environment;
• Disaster relief;
• Promotion of community safety;
• Protection of human rights or promotion of peace;
• International cooperation;
• Promotion of a society with equal gender participation;
• Sound nurturing of youth;
• Development of information technology;
• Promotion of science and technology;
• Promotion of economic activities;
• Development of vocational expertise or expansion of employment opportunities;
• Protection of consumers;
• Administration of organizations that engage in the above activities or provision of liaison services, advice, or assistance in connection with the above activities;
• Tourism promotion; or
• Rural revitalization.

GIAs and GIFs are not required to carry out activities in the public interest to obtain legal personality. For PIIAs and PIIFs, one national committee and 47 committees corresponding to each respective prefecture must determine that the organization’s activities are in the public interest. PIIAs and PIIFs must also pursue one or more of the “specified nonprofit activities” listed in an attachment to the Act on Authorization of Public Interest Incorporated Associations and Public Interest Incorporated Foundations.

Japan’s national legal framework institutionalizes several standard mechanisms for public participation, primarily through the Administrative Procedure Act. This Act mandates a Public Comment Procedure, which requires administrative organs to widely solicit opinions from the public before establishing or revising cabinet orders, ministerial ordinances, and other regulatory “commands.” Further, the Act sets rules for public participation in specific cases, such as the right to attend an administrative hearing before a citizen is subjected to a serious adverse disposition. While local governments have greater autonomy to establish comprehensive Citizen Participation Ordinances, these national mechanisms ensure a baseline level of transparency and citizen engagement in central government policymaking.

Other relevant laws and regulations affecting public participation include the following.

• The Constitution of Japan (Constitution November 3, 1946)
• Act on the Settlement of Environmental Pollution Disputes (Act No. 108 of June 1, 1970)
• Environmental Impact Assessment Act (Act No. 81 of June 13, 1997)
• Act on Promotion of Specified Non-Profit Activities (Act No. 7 of March 25, 1998)
• Act on Access to Information Held by Administrative Organs (Act No. 42 of May 14, 1999)
• Act on the Assessment of Releases of Specified Chemical Substances in the Environment and the Promotion of Management Improvement (Act No. 86 of July 13, 1999)
• Act on Criminal Trials with the Participation of Saiban-in (Act No. 63 of May 28, 2004)
• Act on General Incorporated Associations and General Incorporated Foundations (Act No. 48 of June 2, 2006)
• Act on Authorization of Public Interest Incorporated Associations and Public Interest Incorporated Foundations (Act No. 49 of June 2, 2006)
• Act on the Promotion of Women’s Active Engagement in Professional Life (Act No. 64 of September 4, 2015)
• Basic Act on the Environment (Act No. 91 of December 1, 2018)
• Commentaries on the Guidelines under the Whistleblower Protection Act (Cabinet Office Notification No. 118 of 2021)
• JICA Guidelines for Environmental and Social Considerations (January 2022)

Non-profit organizations that are registered under the Act on Promotion of Specified Non-Profit Activities should not promote, support, or oppose any political doctrine or policy and not recommend, support, or oppose any candidate for a specific public office, including any of the public offices prescribed in Article 3 of the Public Offices Election Act (Act No. 100 of 1950).

While the Japanese government and municipalities make efforts to publicize participation mechanisms like the Public Comment Procedure through official websites, public notices, and sometimes social media, citizen awareness remains a significant challenge. Low public participation is often attributed to the complexity and volume of official documents and general skepticism regarding whether public opinion will genuinely influence final policy outcomes.

In one controversial example, Greenpeace Japan activists intercepted a box of whale meat from a delivery depot  in 2008, to expose alleged embezzlement within Japan’s government-subsidized whaling program. They were subsequently arrested and charged with theft and trespass, despite presenting the meat to prosecutors as evidence of corruption. The individuals were ultimately found guilty and received a suspended prison sentence in September 2010, a verdict that drew international criticism as an attempt to suppress activism and the public’s right to know about corruption.

Although the financial cost of forming a legal non-profit organization in Japan is low, there are significant institutional and administrative barriers to formation. Even the most accessible corporate forms impose baseline structural requirements: General Incorporated Associations (GIAs) must be established with at least two members and a board member, while General Incorporated Foundations (GIFs) are required to secure initial capital of at least JPY 3 million (approximately USD 17,000 as of October 2025), which can deter grassroots initiatives or limit participation to well-resourced founders. Entities seeking recognition as Public Interest Incorporated Associations or Foundations face additional hurdles, including compliance with detailed statutory criteria under the Act on Authorization of Public Interest Incorporated Associations and Public Interest Incorporated Foundations. These include demonstrating that the organization’s primary purpose serves the public interest, meeting governance and accounting requirements such as the appointment of an auditor, and successfully completing a public interest screening process administered by the Cabinet Office or relevant prefectural authorities.

PIIAs and PIIFs face similar institutional and administrative challenges. These entities must undergo a public interest screening process and receive public interest certification from the Cabinet Office or a Prefectural government, which can require significant organizational resources and time. Civic actors have observed that public interest certification procedures can be burdensome, including requirements to submit extensive governance and financial documentation, and disproportionately impact smaller organizations.

Organizations applying for NPO status under the NPO Law face an even higher burden, including securing at least 10 “members” who have voting rights in the General Assembly, along with a management team of at least three directors and one auditor. Securing the commitment of 14 people who meet the legal criteria can be difficult for nascent organizations.

The NPO registration process is lengthy, typically requiring a minimum of 3 to 4 months to complete. This includes a mandatory one-month public inspection period where application documents are publicly available for citizen review, followed by an administrative review and formal registration. In practice, procedural timelines and documentation requirements may vary by prefecture, creating uneven administrative burdens.

The registration application requires a large volume of detailed and specialized documents, including articles of incorporation, business plans, and activity budget plans for the first two fiscal years. The complexity of preparing these documents often necessitates hiring an administrative scrivener, adding to the overall cost.

Moreover, prospective organizations must ensure that their core activities fall within one of the 20 defined “Specified Non-Profit Activities” under the NPO Promotion Act, which can limit eligibility for groups with cross-cutting or advocacy-focused mandates.

Under Article 67 of the NPO Law, competent authorities may investigate, recommend improvements, or issue corrective orders only when a Specified NPO is suspected of violating the law or failing to meet legal requirements.

Competent authorities may cancel Specified NPO status if a group fails to file its annual reports and financial statements for three consecutive years, or fails to comply with an order to rectify legal deficiencies listed in Article 65 of the NPO Law. As of June 2025, more than 5,300 NPOs have had their status cancelled, mostly due to not filing annual reports and financial statements.

There have been several cases of arbitrary shutdowns of Specified NPOs. For example, authorities sometimes warn Specified NPOs to refrain from engaging in activity areas beyond the scope of the “Specified Non-Profit Activities” designated in their registration documents. CSOs have criticized the inflexible application of these rules. For instance, after the great earthquake and tsunami in 2011, authorities claimed that starting emergency projects in tsunami-affected areas was illegal for groups focused only on international cooperation as their main issue area.

Japan does not formally restrict the operations of non-registered groups, and many small, volunteer-led CSOs operate informally. However, only registered NPOs are eligible for certain government funding schemes, which can limit the operational scope and resource access of unregistered organizations. Civic actors have observed that complex reporting requirements for PIIAs and PIIFs may also pose a barrier to operations for these entities. PIIAs and PIIFs may be required to submit redundant documentation with their annual reports—such as budgets and business plans—even if these documents were submitted during initial registration. Organizations may also be required to provide detailed explanations of routine changes to their governance documents and board membership. These reporting procedures can be difficult for some PIIAs and PIIFs to navigate and force them to use significant staff and time resources to compile required documentation, diminishing their ability to focus on their core missions.

There are no legal barriers restricting NPOs’ access to foreign and domestic funding. However, authorities have recommended that NPOs comply with anti-terrorist and anti-money laundering rules, regulations, and measures, such as those of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) and its 2018 Mutual Evaluation Report of Japan, which recommended that NPOs follow AML/CTF rules and avoid undertaking activities in high-risk areas where terrorist groups operate. While compliance is generally procedural, overly cautious application of such rules can indirectly restrict access to certain funding sources, particularly for smaller organizations without compliance capacity.

In addition, the process for obtaining “Certified Non-Profit Organization” status, which grants preferential tax treatment for donations, can be complex and resource-intensive. As of June 30, 2025, 1,262 organizations had provisional certification. Only certified NPOs are eligible for these donor tax incentives, meaning that smaller or volunteer-led organizations may face practical limitations in attracting large donations, particularly from corporations or individual donors seeking tax deductions. Operationally, many NPOs also rely heavily on government project funding, which is often competitive, time-bound, and tied to strict reporting requirements. This dependence can constrain organizational autonomy and limit the ability to plan long-term initiatives. Together, these factors create administrative and structural barriers to resources, even in the absence of formal legal prohibitions, with foreign-funded or advocacy-oriented groups potentially facing additional scrutiny.

Under the NPO Law, Specified NPOs are prohibited from:

• proselytizing or conducting religious ceremonies;
• promoting, supporting, or opposing any political doctrine or policy; and
• recommending, supporting, or opposing any candidate for a specific public office.

While these restrictions are intended to prevent partisan or sectarian activity by formally registered NPOs, there is broad consensus that they should not be interpreted to limit issue-based advocacy or critical policy engagement.

Nonetheless, some CSOs have reported chilling effects in practice, citing concerns about strict or inconsistent interpretations of these rules.

Legislation such as the 2013 State Secrets Protection Law, which carries broad definitions and penalties for disclosure of classified information, has raised free expression concerns, as have limited legal protections for whistleblowers, potential surveillance, and administrative scrutiny.

Such restrictions have led organizations, including public broadcasters and private media, to self-censor or avoid sensitive issues. Investigative journalists and media outlets reporting on corporate misconduct or government policies have encountered administrative or legal challenges, with spillover effects on CSO reporting and advocacy.

As noted in the participation section, in 2008–2010, Greenpeace Japan activists faced arrest and prosecution when investigating government-subsidized whaling, raising concerns about restricting investigative reporting on government misconduct.

Freedom of assembly is guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of Japan, providing a legal foundation for gatherings, demonstrations, and public forums. However, in practice, public assemblies are subject to notification and permit requirements under the Police Duties Execution Act and local public safety ordinances, which regulate time, place, and manner to ensure public order. While these regulations are procedural in intent, they can create practical constraints for civil society, particularly for large-scale, spontaneous, or politically sensitive events.

Notable examples include the nationwide anti-nuclear protests following the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster. Demonstrators in Tokyo and other cities were often confined to pedestrian streets near government offices, as public roads were generally not approved for protest use. Similarly, organizers of environmental, labor union, and LGBTQ advocacy events have reported difficulties securing permits or reserving public facilities, illustrating how administrative requirements can limit the scope or visibility of assemblies.

Smaller or volunteer-led CSOs frequently face additional hurdles navigating procedural and administrative requirements for assemblies, including understanding local rules, filing notifications in advance, and complying with safety-related restrictions.

Justice, truth and reparations long overdue for survivors of so-called ‘comfort women’ system (March 2026)
UN experts expressed grave concern at the continued lack of justice for survivors of the so-called ‘comfort women’ system established and controlled by the Japanese Imperial Army during World War II. “Nearly 80 years on, victims and their families continue to face the denial of their right to truth, justice, reparation and memorialisation,” the experts said. Up to 200,000 women and girls were reportedly subjected to trafficking, rape and sexual slavery, as well as to arbitrary deprivation of liberty and, in certain cases, to enforced disappearance, in the ‘comfort women’ system, the experts noted. Most survivors from the Republic of Korea, China, the Netherlands, Timor-Leste, Indonesia and the Philippines, among others, have passed away and those who remain are of advanced age.

Parties sharply divided over anti-espionage legislation (February 2026)
About 90 percent of Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) candidates in the Lower House election favor anti-espionage legislation espoused by Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi, a sharp contrast to sentiment expressed among less-conservative parties, a survey showed. The support rate for the proposed law is even higher among candidates from the LDP’s coalition partner, Nippon Ishin (Japan Innovation Party), the Democratic Party for the People, and Sanseito, according to the joint survey. On the other side, nearly half of the candidates from the Centrist Reform Alliance (Chudo) oppose the bill. And more than 90 percent of candidates from the Japanese Communist Party, Reiwa Shinsengumi and the Social Democratic Party are against it, the survey showed.

Hiroshima protesters arrested and forcibly removed as new anti-spy law raises concerns (January 2026)
About 500 anti-war and anti-nuclear civic groups demonstrated near the Atomic Bomb Dome in Hiroshima on August 6, 2025, coinciding with an official ceremony commemorating the victims of the atomic bombing. The ceremony and demonstration were both significant due to their historical connection, as the date marked the 80th anniversary of the US attack on western Japan. The protestors are linked to the radical-left group Chukaku-ha. Meanwhile, during a parliamentary session on November 26, 2025, Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi said that her Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) government would soon consider new legislation on “spy prevention.” Takaichi’s pledge to “speedily draft” such a law.

Japan should defend the International Criminal Court (October 2025)
On October 9, Human Rights Watch with Tokyo-based Human Rights Now and Peace Boat held an event at the Japanese Diet to press the Japanese government to step up its efforts to defend the International Criminal Court(ICC). At the event, which was endorsed by three bipartisan caucuses, Nonpartisan Association for Humanitarian Diplomacy, Parliamentary Association for Supporting Democratization of Myanmar, and Nonpartisan Parliamentary Association for Reconsidering Human Rights Diplomacy, nearly 20 Diet members urged the Japanese government to take stronger measures to protect the ICC. “Japan’s international credibility relies on our actions,” said Masahiko Shibayama, a former education minister.