Is there a specific sports tribunal in Japan?

Japan does have a dedicated sports tribunal: the Japan Sports Arbitration Agency (JSAA), established in 2003. The JSAA serves as an independent body for resolving a wide range of domestic sports disputes. Its main functions include arbitration and mediation procedures focused on sport-related issues affecting athletes, sports organisations, and other stakeholders. The JSAA acts in response to the increasing complexity of sports disputes.

Many sporting organisations in Japan have developed their own internal disciplinary proceedings, and some of them (e.g., Japan Football Association (JFA), Japan Basketball Association (JBA), etc.) have their own mediation services. The decisions made by sports organisations can be appealed to JSAA if the sports organisation has adopted “automatic acceptance clauses” that give the JSAA jurisdiction over the decision. The majority of Japanese national sports federations (about 84% as of April 2025) have adopted “automatic acceptance clauses,” however, the JFA only allows appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport.

Beyond the JSAA, various general forms of alternative dispute resolution (ADR)—such as court-annexed mediation and conciliation—are available for broader civil and labour disputes in Japan, but these are not tailored specifically for sports cases.

What Cases Can (or Cannot) Be Submitted to the JSAA?

The JSAA provides arbitration services and mediation services, and they cover the following issues respectively:

Arbitration:

Mainly for athletes:

• Sports Arbitration: Appeals against decisions made by sports organisations, concerning the selection of representative athletes or disciplinary sanctions imposed on athletes or others for reasons other than anti-doping rule violations.
• Doping Arbitration: Appeals against decisions made by the Japan Anti-Doping Disciplinary Panel concerning violations of the Japan Anti-Doping Code by athletes.

Both for athletes and sports organisations:

• Specific Sports Arbitration: Arbitration proceedings broadly covering sports-related disputes not subject to other arbitration procedures based on a specific arbitration agreement.

For sports organisations:

• Sports Arbitration for Governance Code: Procedure for handling appeals by member organisations against non-compliance determinations in sports organisation governance code compliance assessments conducted by the Japanese Olympic Committee (JOC), Japan Sports Association (JSPO) or Japanese Para-Sports Association (JPSA).
• Sports Arbitration for Affiliated Sports Bodies: Procedure for member organisations of the JOC, JSPO, or JPSA lodging an appeal against disciplinary action imposed, based on the respective regulations of JOC, JSPO, or JPSA.

Other arbitration proceedings:

• Doping Arbitration for LPGA (Ladies Professional Golfers Association of Japan): Proceedings to resolve disputes occurring from the doping test of the Ladies Professional Golfers Association of Japan.

Mediation:

Sports Mediation (Conciliation) Based on a Specific Mediation Agreement: Procedure concerning disputes relating to sport, wherein a mediator attends and facilitates the parties in reaching an amicable settlement. However, with respect to disputes concerning a) decisions made by referees during competition, and b) disciplinary decisions made by sports organisations or their bodies concerning sporting competitions or their administration, only procedures aimed at assisting both parties in confirming and understanding the facts shall be conducted.

There are important aspects to be noted:

Labour disputes: Standard labour disagreements (such as wage or employment termination disputes between athletes and teams) are usually handled by Japan’s general labour ADR or civil court systems including labour tribunal, not the JSAA. Japan has specialised ADR systems and government bodies for general labour and employment disputes. However, as the professional athlete agreement is not deemed as an employment contract under Japanese law generally, professional athletes cannot use those general labour dispute resolution systems. Therefore, contract disputes between professional athletes and their teams are brought to JSAA or an ordinary civil court, depending on the existence of an arbitration agreement.

Legal standing: While arbitration by the JSAA is widely used, not all disputes are considered “legal disputes” that courts will hear. Courts in Japan sometimes decline to adjudicate internal sports association matters unless the dispute has clear legal dimensions or broader implications, such as unreasonable disqualification. In those cases, arbitration at the JSAA often becomes the only practical avenue for recourse.

Conclusion

Japan’s approach to sports dispute resolution centres on JSAA, which offers specialised arbitration and mediation services for a broad spectrum of sports conflicts. While major sports-related cases—such as those dealing with competition, disciplinary issues, and eligibility—fall under the JSAA’s remit, whether a contract dispute (e.g., termination of athlete contract between an athlete and a club) can be handled by JSAA depends on the existence of an arbitration agreement. This system, combining both specialised and general pathways for dispute resolution, ensures a fair, consistent, and internationally recognized approach to sports governance in Japan, while still providing flexibility for special cases and parties’ preferences.

Codification and revision of Sports Law in Japan

Sports law in Japan is primarily codified through the Basic Act on Sport (Act No. 78 of 2011), which was enacted as a comprehensive revision of the Sports Promotion Act, which had been enacted in 1961. This Act was enacted to systematically and comprehensively promote sports by articulating the fundamental principles of sport, establishing governmental responsibilities, and clarifying the duties of organisations involved in sports. The Act recognises that leading a happy and fulfilling life through sport is a fundamental right and that access should be provided to all citizens regardless of race, gender, age, disability status, etc., promoting “sport is a universal human culture” as a core value.

The Basic Act on Sport was revised, and it was enforced in September 2025, which is a significant step toward the latest topics, such as harassment issues, climate change, regional population decline, and diversity and coexistence. Here are the key details of the 2025 revision:

• Redefinition of Sports: In addition to the existing pillars of “participating, watching, and supporting,” the new keyword “gathering and connecting” was added to the fundamental principles, expanding the functions of sports (Preamble of the Act).
• Countermeasures for Violence and Harassment: The Act requires national and local governments to implement measures preventing violence, sexual remarks, and defamation on the internet directed at those who participate in sports, and requires sports organisations to make an effort to prevent those issues (Article 29 of the Act).
• Prevention of Manipulation and Anti-Doping Measures: The national government is required to make an effort to implement measures preventing manipulations in collaboration with sports organisations and is required to implement measures of anti-doping activities in collaboration with the relevant organisations such as the Japan Anti-Doping Agency (Articles 29-2 and 29-3 of the Act).

Transparency: Sports organisations are required to endeavour to strengthen its operational foundation and ensure sound management (Article 5 of the Act) and to ensure fairness and transparency of its operation by establishing standards which it must adhere, disclosing the status of measures taken in accordance with such guidelines, and other appropriate means (Article 29-5 of the Act). While the Basic Act on Sport serves as Japan’s keystone sports statute, specific areas are governed by additional laws and codes:

• Japan Anti-Doping Code established by the Japan Anti-Doping Agency, which sets national standards for anti-doping and is fully compliant with the World Anti-Doping Code.
• Act on the Promotion of Anti-Doping Activities in Sports (Act No. 58 of 2018), which was also amended and enforced in September 2025, establishes the fundamental principles for promoting anti-doping activities, in accordance with the spirit of the Basic Act on Sport and the international conventions against doping. The revision in 2025 explicitly mandates cooperation between the Japan Sports Fairness Promotion Organisation (J-Fairness), responsible for anti-doping activities, and national/local governments.
• Act on Carrying Out, etc. Sports Promotion Vote (Act No. 63 of 1998), governing the operation of sports promotion vote (i.e., sports lotteries) and use of proceeds from the sports promotion vote.
• Act on Ensuring the Proper Distribution of Show and Event Tickets by Prohibiting the Unauthorised Resale of Specified Show and Event Tickets (Act No. 103 of 2018) regulates Unauthorised resale of tickets for sporting events
• Penal Code regulates gambling and match-fixing in sports.

National Sports Authorities and Oversight.

The below are the primary oversight bodies in Japan.

1. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology

Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) is a primary national authority for sports policy, school-based sports, and funding. Historically, the main administrative body for sports in Japan.

2. Japan Sports Agency

Japan Sports Agency (JSA) was established in October 2015 as an external bureau under MEXT, the JSA serves as the central administrative arm for sports. Its responsibilities include formulating and coordinating sports policy, promotional activities, international sporting competitiveness, anti-doping, and public health through sports participation.

The JSA is tasked with actualizing the principles outlined in the Basic Act on Sport and works in close cooperation with MEXT, other ministries, and national/local sports federations.

3. Additional Agencies and Organisations

The Ministry of Economy, Trade, and Industry (METI) creates opportunities for enterprises and sports clubs to connect, and for stadiums and arenas to be reformed.

The Japanese Olympic Committee (JOC) and the Japanese Para-Sports Association (JPSA) play key roles in elite and international sports.

Japan Sport Association (JSPO) is Japan’s unified sports organisation, established to promote national sports. In collaboration with sports organisations such as JSA, JOC and JPSA, it organises and operates nationwide sporting events like the Japan Games, whilst also undertaking various initiatives to advance sports development.

Japan Sport Council (JSC) is an independent administrative agency established in 2003 according to a specific act1. To promote sports and enhance the health of pupils and students, it shall undertake the appropriate and efficient operation of the sports facilities it establishes, provide necessary assistance for the promotion of sports, and conduct research and studies, as well as collect and provide materials, concerning sports and the maintenance and enhancement of the health of pupils and students.

The Japan Anti-Doping Agency (JADA) operates a nationwide anti-doping program overseeing compliance, education, and adjudication of violations, in accordance with both the national code and international standards.

National Federations

Japan has a robust system of national sports federations and associations. These organisations regulate individual sports and are responsible for implementing national-level/regional-level policies, competitions, and compliance programs (especially anti-doping). Most of them are members of JOC, JPSA and/or JSPO. Many of these federations are recognized as public interest incorporated associations, giving them important legal standing and oversight responsibilities.

Conclusion

Sports law in Japan is principally codified under the Basic Act on Sport, which underscores the right to participate in sports and the necessity of promoting activities for the benefit of society as a whole. Oversight and administration fall mainly under JSA—working within the broader context of MEXT—but also involve inter-ministerial cooperation and the active participation of national federations and specialised agencies. This structured approach ensures coherent governance, international alignment (especially for anti-doping and fair play), and sustained development of sport for both elite athletes and the general public in Japan.

Alcohol Advertising

Under Japanese law, individuals under 20 years of age are prohibited from consuming alcoholic beverages. Also, there is a law that aims to prevent harm caused by alcohol drinking. Under those laws, it is stipulated that businesses that manufacture or sell alcoholic beverages shall take measures to prevent the consumption of alcohol by individuals under 20, and the occurrence, progression, and recurrence of alcohol-related health disorders. In addition, drunk driving is strictly punished in Japan under criminal law.

In response to the requirements under those laws, as a part of its social responsibility and industry compliance, organisation of business entities in alcohol industry in Japan set self-regulatory standard regarding alcohol advertisement in Japan. The main self-regulatory standard named “Voluntary Standards for the Advertising and Promotion of Alcoholic Beverages” are set by major industry body, the Liaison Council on Alcohol Consumption. Under the standard, key industry rules include, without limitation:

• Alcohol advertisements must not be placed in television programmes, radio programmes, newspapers, magazines, or internet media that are intended for individuals under the age of 20.
• Characters or celebrities that are appealing to young individuals under 20 shall not be used in alcohol advertisements.
• Television advertisements for alcohol are generally prohibited from airing between 5 a.m. and 6 p.m. except for certain educational or responsible drinking messages.
• Alcohol advertising may only be shown in programs where at least 70% of the audience is of legal drinking age, i.e. above 20.
• Alcohol advertisements must be accompanied by warning messages of risks or rules associated with alcohol drinking, such as, risks of excessive drinking, risks of alcohol to pregnant or nursing women, risks of alcohol drinking while playing sport, prohibition of alcohol consumption by individuals under 20, prohibition of drunk driving.
• Advertisements of alcohol beverages must not be confused with those of soft drinks.

These rules are applicable for advertisements in sports settings. While these rules are not enforceable by law as they are self-regulatory standard, negative public relations consequences ensure industry compliance, and individual teams or venues may impose stricter standards.

Tobacco Advertising

Under Japanese law, individuals under 20 years of age are prohibited from smoking tobacco, and under Tobacco Business Act, it is provided that advertiser of manufactured tobacco should make efforts to prevent smoking by persons under 20, and should take into consideration the relationship between tobacco consumption and health, and ensure that such advertising does not become excessive. In accordance with this law, the government agency in charge of tobacco business has issued a general guideline as an administrative rule regarding advertisements of manufactured tobacco.

Under the guidelines, it is provided that, when conducting tobacco advertising, full consideration must be given to prevent smoking among people under 20, and care must be taken to ensure that the advertising does not excessively or broadly encourage smoking. Additionally, appropriate information regarding the adverse health effects of tobacco should be provided in order to help create an environment in which individuals can make informed decisions about whether to smoke, based on their own personal responsibility. Based on this, advertising for tobacco should follow the following basic requirements:

• Advertising methods should be carefully considered to prevent smoking among people under 20. That is, the content of tobacco advertisements should not attract the attention of individuals under 20, should not be targeted at them, and should include a clear reminder that smoking by persons under 20 is prohibited.
• Care should be taken to avoid misleading people about the adverse health effects of tobacco, and appropriate information should be provided regarding the relationship between smoking and health.
• Avoid advertising content and methods that broadly and actively encourage smoking.

In addition, the guideline provides for the requirements aimed to each media, such as:

• TV, Radio, Website: Advertisement of tobacco must not be conducted unless it is technically possible to target only individuals who are 20 years of age or older.
• Newspaper, Magazine, Other Publications: Advertisements should primarily target readers who are 20 years of age or older. Even in such cases, due consideration must be given to the advertising methods used in daily newspapers, in light of their influence.
• Posters, Signs, Buildings, Structures (e.g. trains and vehicles): Advertisements shall be conducted only at tobacco sales locations, smoking areas, or places that are exclusively used by individuals who are 20 years of age or older.
• Sponsorships: Sponsorships shall be limited to events in which all participants involved in the operation are 20 years of age or older, and which are primarily targeted at individuals aged 20 and above. Sponsorship shall not be provided for events intended for broadcast, unless it is technically possible to ensure that only individuals aged 20 or older are targeted.

Further, in accordance with the guideline above, to ensure the purpose, Tobacco Institute of Japan sets voluntary rules to manage tobacco advertising. These voluntary rules include, without limitation:

• Prohibition of tobacco advertising on: television, radio, and similar broadcasting media, movie; the bodies of transportation vehicles such as trains, buses, taxis, ships, aircraft; and video tapes, audio cassettes, CDs, DVDs, and other similar recording media.
• In the case of product advertisements delivered via internet websites, such advertisements may only be displayed if the viewer is confirmed to be 20 years of age or older. Upon verification, a unique identifier—such as a combination of user ID or customer number and password—may be issued to the viewer. The advertisement may then be displayed only when this identifier is entered, thereby ensuring that the viewer is confirmed to be at least 20 years old.
• In newspapers, product advertisements should not be placed on the front page, back page, television program listings page, lifestyle/family page, children’s page, or sports page.
• Sponsorship shall not be provided in the following cases: events or activities bearing trademarks or similar branding where there is no reasonable basis to determine that all participants and operational staff are 20 years of age or older; teams or individuals bearing trademarks or similar branding where not all sponsored parties are confirmed to be 20 years of age or older.
• Sponsorship should also be subject to the following conditions: at least 75% of the audience must be 20 years of age or older; the sponsorship must not be specifically appealing to individuals under the age of 20; the sponsorship must not be intended for broadcast or transmission via electromagnetic media or similar channels.

Considering those guidelines and voluntary rules, in Japan, advertisement of tobacco products in sports settings are generally prohibited especially when such sport is broadcast, except for the situation where audience is confirmed to be at least 20 years old or above.

Betting Advertising

In Japan, betting is generally prohibited as a crime under the Penal Code, except for betting specifically permitted under special legislation. Those are betting on horse races, bicycle races, motorcycle races, motorboat races, football matches and basketball matches, and such betting platforms are operated by the Japanese government, municipal bodies, or government related organisations. Unless permitted as those exceptions, betting and the provision of a betting platform is deemed to be criminal offence. Online betting, including sports betting, is also illegal as long as accessed from the territory of Japan, even if such online platform is legally provided in foreign country.

For the forms of betting specifically licensed by the government, under the self-regulatory guideline set by National Liaison Council of Public Racing Organizers, advertising and promotion thereof must comply with rules for: (i) prevention and mitigation of gambling addiction; (ii) protection of minors (the minimum betting age is generally 18-20 years for sports-related betting); and (iii) prevention of excessive stimulation of speculative interest. Since any betting activities other than the exceptions above are criminal in Japan, advertising and promotion of betting can be deemed as acts of aiding and solicitation of those crimes, and therefore those acts themselves can also be deemed as criminal offense.

Further, new legal amendments in 2025 make the promotion and advertising of overseas online casinos and gambling platforms expressly illegal and prohibited in Japan. This includes prohibiting banner ads, influencer endorsements, affiliate links, and social-media-driven marketing related to offshore gambling operators—even if the operator is legal overseas. The law operates by enabling internet and social media platforms to remove violating content, with the National Police Agency overseeing compliance. These rules supplement longstanding prohibitions against unlicensed gambling and reinforce the separation between sports and illegal betting activity.

In sum, advertising and promotion of betting in Japan are strictly prohibited and can be subject to criminal punishment in Japan, except when such betting is permitted by special legislation. This is also true in sports setting and therefore advertising of betting in sports setting in Japan should not be conducted.

Sports Venues, Clothing, and Athlete Sponsorship

Advertising on sports infrastructure and official clothing is governed by both the general legal landscape and the specific regulations set by sporting federations:

1. General Regulations:

With respect to advertisements in general in Japan, the Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations (“AUPMR”) may apply, and the act prohibits (i) exaggerated advertising, (ii) false advertising, and (iii) any other misleading advertising.

In addition, any advertising that may (i) cause confusion in relation to a well-known product indication, (ii) misappropriate a well-known product indication, (iii) mislead indication of origin or quality, and (iv) cause damage to the business reputation of another company in a competitive relationship, could violate the Unfair Competition Prevention Act.

2. Sporting Federation’s Regulations:

National and international federations (such as World Athletics and the Japan Association of Athletics Federations) strictly limit the size, placement, and frequency of sponsor logos on athlete uniforms. There are usually rules against multiple sponsor logos or over-commercialization to preserve the integrity of sport and maintain compliance with international standards.

Alcohol and tobacco branding on clothing or at venues is generally discouraged (or outright restricted in youth and amateur sports). For major international events (like the Olympics or World Cups), stricter rules set by event organizers and governing bodies apply, often completely barring such sponsorships in line with international norms.

Gambling company branding is not permitted if it promotes activities illegal under Japanese law, which effectively excludes unlicensed betting operators from official teamwear, venue signage, and broadcast partnerships.

Stealth Marketing and Social Media

Under AUPMR, since 2023, Japan has also strengthened its position on stealth marketing (undisclosed advertising, including by athletes or teams on social media). New rules of AUPMR require clear disclosure of any sponsorship or paid endorsement relationships, i.e. more specifically, “representations made by a business operator concerning the transaction of goods or services it supplies, which are deemed difficult for ordinary consumers to recognize as such” are expressly prohibited as false or deceptive representation. Non-compliance can attract reputational and legal consequences, such as administrative order, publication of the name of violating company, or monetary penalty, adding another layer of responsibility for brands and sporting personalities working in the Japanese market.

Conclusion

The Japanese sports advertising framework is distinguished by a blend of industry self-regulation, statutory regulation and prohibition, and strong adherence to international sporting standards concerning marketing on uniforms and event infrastructure. While restrictions on alcohol and tobacco marketing lean on voluntary codes based on statutory requirements, recent legal reforms show a clear intent to curtail the promotion of illegal gambling and ensure responsible advertising. For foreign and domestic entities, understanding these nuances is essential to conducting effective, legal, and socially responsible sports marketing in Japan.

Legal and Policy Framework Against Match-Fixing

Criminal Law, Rules of Sports Governing Body and Government Action

First of all, there is no statute generally regulating match-fixing in Japan. Japan combats match-fixing primarily through its Criminal Code and closely related regulations when match-fixing is conducted as a part of gambling, obstruction of business or other way relating to any crime. Most forms of sports gambling are illegal under Japanese law, except for the sports lotteries called “WINNTER”, “BIG” and “toto” operated by Japan Sports Council, where you can bet on football and basketball and which is not a public institution but is an organisation having a public nature, and four government-approved sports: horse racing, bicycle racing (keirin), motorboat racing, and motorcycle racing. Match-fixing in these government-supervised sports is explicitly criminalized and subject to severe penalties. For example, Article 31, Item 3 of the Horse Racing Act stipulates that any jockey who, with the intent to obtain property benefits for oneself or another, fails to allow a horse to fully exert its abilities during a race shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than three years or a fine of not more than 3,000,000 yen. Also, jockeys must enter the ‘adjustment room’ by 9:00 p.m. on the day before the race. The purpose of entering the ‘adjustment room’ is to ensure that jockeys are in peak physical condition and to prevent them from coming into contact with outsiders prior to the race. Therefore, the use of mobile phones and other communication devices is restricted after entering the room. If a jockey breaches this rule, he/she may be suspended from training or riding for a specified period of time, or be subject to a fine of up to 1,000,000 yen. Government oversight, combined with strict licensing and monitoring of betting activities, acts as a strong deterrent against manipulation in these legal sectors.

As for the sports other than the four government-approved sports, match-fixing is regulated by the regulations of each sport, and breach of the regulations results in a punishment by the governing body of that sport, including sporting sanctions (e.g., suspension from matches, disqualification) and financial fines.

Beyond criminal penalties, Japan’s sports integrity policies have evolved under its Sport Basic Plans. The latest plan (the Third Sport Basic Plan2) identifies sport integrity—including promoting the dissemination of the Governance Code to Sports Organisations, developing anti-doping activities through education, training, research activities, etc—as a top national priority. This ensures that sports organisations implement codes of conduct, integrity education, and monitoring mechanisms.

High-Profile Cases and Cultural Context

Japan’s response to match-fixing is shaped by historical scandals, including the infamous Black Mist Scandal, which is a series of allegations and incidents involving professional baseball officials allegedly involved in match-fixing involving the exchange of money, and match-fixing of sumo wrestling found out in 2011. In sumo, there had been suspicion of match-fixing historically, which the Japan Sumo Association had denied, but the match-fixing scandal came to light when some sumo wrestlers were found to be involved in baseball gambling. Based on these experiences, official investigations and punitive actions in the last two decades signal a strong shift toward zero tolerance among Japanese sports organisations—especially where criminal activity or organized gambling are involved.

The Regulation of Sports Betting and its Role

The sports betting industry in Japan is highly regulated and largely state-controlled. Only football and basketball for the sports lotteries and four “public sports” are subject to legal betting, which is managed by public agencies. The revenue from these activities supports public welfare projects, and betting platforms for these sports must strictly comply with legal and transparency requirements. Private, unlicensed betting—including most online betting, overseas betting sites, and casinos—remains illegal (i.e., in addition to it being illegal for Japanese residents to place bets on overseas sports betting, it may also be illegal under Japanese law to offer sports betting services to Japanese residents from overseas) and Japanese residents who used overseas betting sites have been vigorously prosecuted. A network of ministries oversees different sports: for example, the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries regulates horse racing, while other ministries regulate additional sports.

Legislative reforms in 20253 have further cracked down on illegal online gambling, prohibiting the establishment and operation of online casino sites and apps targeting unspecified individuals within Japan, as well as acts of directing users to online casinos via social media and other platforms, and ordering municipal governments to ensure thorough awareness of the prohibition of gambling at online casinos.

International Agreements: The Macolin Convention

Japan has not yet ratified the Macolin Convention (Council of Europe Convention on the Manipulation of Sports Competitions), the world’s leading international treaty against match-fixing. While the Convention, enacted in 2019, has been signed and ratified by several European and other nations, Japan remains outside the list of signatories. Discussions are ongoing, with rising concern over the scale of illegal betting involving Japanese sports and athletes fuelling calls for swift ratification and the establishment of a domestic coordinating body.

The absence of ratification does not mean inaction—Japan has attended related international forums and is actively working on measures domestically and in collaboration with international partners.

The Role of the Sports Betting Industry

The legal betting industry in Japan operates under very strict oversight. Public bodies manage legal betting and proceeds often support the public sector. Regulations prohibit private, offshore, and Unauthorised betting operations, and recent updates specifically ban advertising or facilitating access to illegal betting. This approach contrasts with many countries where the private sector plays a more direct role but aligns with Japan’s strong anti-corruption and anti-match-fixing posture.

Conclusion

Japan employs a multifaceted approach to combat match-fixing: strict criminal laws, state-controlled and regulated betting industries, targeted integrity policies for sports organisations, and ongoing public dialogue about best practices. While the country has not ratified the Macolin Convention, high-profile scandals and the enormous scale of illegal betting have sparked renewed urgency and coordination, possibly paving the way for future legislative and international harmonization. For international stakeholders, Japan’s model demonstrates a unique blend of government oversight, legal rigor, and evolving policy guided by both domestic challenges and global trends.

Institutions Safeguarding Sport Integrity in Japan

In Japan, several institutions and rules work collectively to combat doping, abuse, and other integrity threats across all levels of sport.

1. Japan Sport Council – Sport Integrity Unit

The Japan Sport Council (JSC) established the Sport Integrity Unit in 2014 to protect and promote integrity throughout Japanese sport. This Unit is responsible for combating doping, strengthening governance and compliance, and ensuring a safe environment for athletes. Its activities include:

• Assessing governance and compliance of national federations and providing support for improvement measures as necessary
• Operating independent consultation and investigation systems for complaints about violence and harassment in elite sports coaching.
• Conducting intelligence activities concerning the prevention of doping in sports, doping investigations, and operating a doping consultation system.
• Planning and delivering sports integrity training for sports organisations.

2. Japan Anti-Doping Agency

Japan Anti-Doping Agency (JADA), founded in 2001, is Japan’s principal authority for anti-doping. It is an independent organisation that works to:

• Enforcing the Japan Anti-Doping Code (fully compliant with the World Anti-Doping Code (WADA Code)).
• Implementing anti-doping education and awareness campaigns.
• Planning doping tests to be conducted domestically, and conducting in-competition and out-of-competition testing.
• Managing the results of domestic doping tests in accordance with the WADA Code to ensure fairness.
• Conducting intelligence activities such as information gathering, analysis, and evaluation to identify anti-doping rule violations that cannot be detected by doping tests alone, and to enhance the precision of doping test planning and implementation
• Training Doping Control Personnel (Doping Control Officers and Blood Collection Officers) and Educators.

Nearly every national sports federation in Japan, as well as collegiate and school-level organisations, adopts these anti-doping rules by reference.

3. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology and Japan Sports Agency

The Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) and the Japan Sports Agency (JSA) coordinate and support sports policy at a national level, including establishing integrity measures, developing compliance requirements, and overseeing abuse prevention programs. JSA adopted the Governance Code for National Sport Federation Members as well as Governance Code for General Sports Organisation Members (collectively, Governance Codes for Sports Organisations), which include general principles for integrity, transparency, and organisational accountability. National sport federations and other sports organisations must disclose their compliance and undergo governance audits.

4. Additional Safeguarding Bodies and Initiatives

• Japanese Olympic Committee (JOC) and JSA both publicly support initiatives against violence and abuse, and have adopted declarations and education programs for improving safeguarding standards.
• Schools and youth clubs are covered by special notices and educational guidelines issued by MEXT or JSA, especially focused on eradicating corporal punishment and abusive coaching in junior sports settings.

Applicable Rules and Codes

The main bodies apply a range of regulations across the spectrum of integrity issues:

• Japan Anti-Doping Code (the latest version issued in 2021): Applicable to the JOC, the Japan Paralympic Committee, the JSA, national sports federations affiliated with JADA, and prefectural sports associations, establishes the procedures, rights, and obligations for testing, education, and enforcement.
• Governance Codes for Sports Organisations: Developed by JSA and set standards for transparency, term limits for board members, compliance audits, and public disclosure requirements.
• Disposal Standard Guidelines for Violence and Harassment on Coaching: Developed by MEXT and sports bodies following high-profile abuse cases, providing ideas of disciplinary procedures for coaches and education programs for athletes.
• Sport Basic Act: Revised in 2025: Recognises every person’s right to fair participation and mandates measures for sport integrity and anti-doping as national priorities.

Conclusion

Japan’s commitment to sport integrity is underpinned by a robust institutional framework: the JSC’s Sport Integrity Unit, JADA, and coordinated government oversight through MEXT and JSA. These bodies not only enforce rigorous anti-doping standards in line with international practice, but also address broader issues such as violence, harassment, and governance failures. By embedding integrity through clear rules, education, and dedicated oversight mechanisms, Japan seeks to ensure a sporting landscape that is safe, fair, and trusted at every level—demonstrating a model of best practice for countries worldwide.

General Legal Framework on Corruption

Criminal and Civil Liability for Corruption

Japan primarily regulates corruption through its Penal Code4, which targets bribery, breach of trust, and related offences. Bribery involving public officials is expressly criminalised, with significant penalties including imprisonment and fines.

• Bribery of Public Officials: Both the giver and receiver of a bribe (including individuals connected to sports organisations acting as public bodies) can be held criminally liable. Conviction may result in up to seven years’ imprisonment or fines up to ¥2.5 million depending on the position of the violator (Articles 197 to 198 of the Penal Code). For example, one of the directors of the Organising Committee for the Olympic and Paralympic Games Tokyo 2020 was charged with accepting bribes because the officers and employees of the Organising Committee were deemed public officials according to a specific statute5.
• Corruption among Private Individuals: If bribery is conducted in relation to officers of a corporate entity (e.g., limited liability company (Kabushiki Kaisha), General Incorporated Association (Ippan Shadan Hojin), General Incorporated Foundations (Ippan Zaidan Hojin), etc.), the giver and receiver will be punished by up to five years’ imprisonment or fines up to ¥5 million (Article 967 of the Companies Act6, Article 337 of the Act on General Incorporated Associations and General Incorporated Foundations7), although the requirements for establishing bribery are more stringent than the bribery of public officials. Also, criminal liability may arise under “breach of trust” (for corporate officers or employees who, in receiving improper benefits, cause harm to their company), punishable by up to five years’ imprisonment or fines up to ¥500 thousand (Article 247 of the Penal Code).
• A person who conducted unreasonable restraint of trade, such as collusive bidding, will be punished by up to five years’ imprisonment or fines up to ¥5 million (Article 89, Item 1 of the Act on Prohibition of Private Monopolisation and Maintenance of Fair Trade8).

Civil liability may also arise if corrupt acts result in damages to third parties or the corporation itself through the Civil Code or the Companies Act.

Sports-Specific Corruption Regulations

Recent high-profile sports scandals—especially around the Tokyo Olympics—have triggered a wave of reforms targeting corruption and conflicts of interest in the Japanese sporting sector. In response, the government and leading sports bodies have implemented the following regulations and guidelines:

• Governance Guidelines: In March 2023, the Japan Sports Agency and Japan Olympic Committee established new, non-binding guideline to enhance transparency and prevent corruption at major sporting events9. This guideline provides eleven principles, which include the creation of independent committees for executive appointments, restrictions on staff seconded from private companies, rules for sponsor selection, education of compliance to officers, conflict of interest management and other matters.
• Integrity Units: The Japan Sport Council’s Sports Integrity Unit is charged with overseeing compliance and governance, monitoring risks, and supporting NFs in investigating misconduct—acting as a safeguard against match-fixing, bid-rigging, and ethical breaches. Especially, the Sports Integrity Unit establishes a reporting desk for doping and a consultation desk for violence and harassment.
• Education and Prevention: Governing bodies are encouraged to proactively disclose information and educate staff and officials on anti-corruption measures, including the risks of bid-rigging and improper sponsorship deals.

These measures are designed to prevent scandals similar to the Tokyo 2020 bid-rigging affair, in which executives and sponsors faced criminal prosecution for illicit payments regarding Olympic event sponsorships and contracts.

Sports Culture and Unique Challenges

Japanese sport also faces unique challenges, particularly in traditional disciplines like sumo, where non-financial forms of manipulation were historically tolerated. However, recent years have seen a clear shift toward “zero tolerance” for integrity breaches, accompanied by criminal investigation and strong public messaging to restore trust and maintain sponsorship.

Conclusion

Japan regulates corruption in sport through a robust intersection of general criminal law, company law, and specific governance guidelines developed by major sporting organisations. While criminal liability exists for corrupt acts by both public officials and private individuals in a certain position, the primary emphasis remains on prevention, transparency, and internal reform. Sporting bodies operate under enhanced scrutiny and are increasingly required to report on compliance and establish independent oversight systems. These evolving measures underscore Japan’s commitment to protecting the fairness and global reputation of its sporting community in the face of complex integrity challenges.

Legal Framework Regulating Fan Conduct

Venue-Level Regulations and Banning Orders

At the core of Japan’s approach to managing fan behavior are strict venue policies. Sports governing bodies, leagues, clubs and individual stadiums enforce detailed codes of conduct (“Venue Rules”).

For instance, the Japan Professional Football League (J. League) cause clubs to operate matches safely and smoothly according to J. League’s regulations and the home club’s rules, if any, and the club shall be obliged to take measures, such as restricting entry or immediately ejecting spectators who compromise the safety of other spectators and fail to behave appropriately within the stadium and its surrounding areas. Also, J.League establishes the Match Operations Management Regulations, and these Regulations prohibit spectators from bringing the prohibited items (e.g., fireworks, smoke candles, laser pointers, and flags or similar items containing political, discriminatory or insulting expressions) to the venue and doing inappropriate conducts such as violence, discriminatory speech, throwing objects, pitch invasions, and Unauthorised banners. Violations typically result in refusal of entry, removal from the venue, and confiscation of prohibited items. Venue management staff and private security play a crucial role in enforcing these rules, and banners with discriminatory content, or disruptive or unsafe behavior, can lead to immediate removal without refund.

Each club may establish its own rules and let supporters comply with those rules through the contracts as a member of its fan club or through the ticket contracts. Clubs would decide on temporary or permanent bans from attending future matches when the violation is significant.

Laws and Criminal Penalties for Violence

While sanctions under Venue Rules are often the first line of defense, Japan’s general criminal law also applies to violence at sporting events. Assault, battery, and property damage committed at sports venues are prosecutable under the Penal Code, and offenders can face arrest and subsequent criminal penalties, including fines or imprisonment. In severe cases, such as large-scale fights or riots, the police may intervene directly.

In 2025, legal reforms furthered the push for safer sports environments. The revised Basic Act on Sport10 specifically mandates national and local authorities to take and requires sports organisations to make an effort to take measures against any form of physical or verbal abuse, supporting Venue Rules.

Also, any person who causes damage to another through violence, defamation, or similar acts shall be liable to compensate for such damage as an act of tort under the Civil Code.

Discrimination and Defamation

Special attention is given to discriminatory language and behavior. Explicit bans on racist, sexist, or otherwise derogatory speech appear in both stadium regulations and sports governing bodies’ rules. Such acts may lead to lifetime bans from venues according to sports governing bodies’ rules and, defamatory acts, depending on their nature, could result in criminal punishment under the Penal Code as well as civil liability under the Civil Code. Especially, defamation on the SNS could be an insult under the Penal Code (Article 231 of the Penal Code), and the penalty, which had previously been only penal detention or a petty fine, was made more severe by adding imprisonment or imprisonment without work for not more than one year or a fine of not more than 300,000 yen in 2022.

Defamatory statements against athletes on social media are also a serious problem in Japan. Sports organisations and athletes’ associations are taking measures such as issuing statements urging restraint from making such defamatory statements11. Despite this, those who persist in making aggressive defamatory statements would have their identity determined in accordance with the law, and claims for damages under the Civil Code could be pursued. However, the issue under Japanese law remains that the amount of damages awarded is unlikely to be substantial.

Prohibited Items and Crowd Management

Venue Rules strictly limit items such as fireworks, flares, dangerous objects, and oversized banners. The use of drones over stadium grounds is generally banned under the Civil Aeronautics Act, with legal penalties for violation.

Crowd control is maintained by regulating alcohol sales, restricting re-entry in some cases, and requiring orderly entry and exit procedures. Persistent non-compliance or hooliganism may trigger league or club sanctions (e.g., matches behind closed doors).

Cultural and Preventive Aspects

Japan places significant emphasis on a positive supporter culture. Campaigns led by leagues and clubs promote respectful cheering, anti-violence messaging, and non-discrimination. Educational efforts, including video guides and signage, supplement formal regulations and reinforce societal expectations of orderly conduct.

Conclusion

Japan regulates fan behavior at sports events through a rigorous blend of stadium-specific codes, league-wide conduct guidelines, and criminal and civil laws. Banning orders, expulsions, and confiscation of items provide immediate remedies, while criminal penalties are available for severe misconduct. Enhanced by recent legislative reforms, regulatory oversight ensures measures against violence, discrimination, and public disorder remain robust. This multi-layered approach maintains safe, welcoming stadiums and upholds Japan’s broader commitment to integrity and respect in sport.

Club Ownership Models in Japan

Corporate and Traditional Structures

Japanese professional sports clubs, especially in football and baseball, have long roots in the corporate ownership model, where companies establish and support teams to promote brand visibility and employee engagement. Iconic brands like Toyota, Mitsubishi and Nissan have historically owned major clubs, though many leagues—including the Japanese professional football league, J.League—have encouraged clubs to remove its parent company’s name from its club name and foster greater local or independent identity.

Corporate Forms

Most professional sports clubs operate as joint stock companies (Kabushiki Kaisha) for commercial activity, while general incorporated associations (Ippan Shadan Hojin) and general incorporated foundations (Ippan Shadan Zaidan) are used for amateur or community engagement.

Foreign Ownership

There is growing international interest in Japanese clubs. The Red Bull acquisition of a Japanese professional football club, Omiya Ardija in 2024 marked the first time a foreign company achieved full ownership of a Japanese professional league team. While J. League has previously set rules capping foreign shareholding in J. League clubs at less than 50%, allowing only partial, minority stakes by foreign entities, these rules were removed in 2020. However, J. League board approval is still required for the change of ownership, club names, and other matters.

As of 2025, curbs on foreign ownership of professional sports clubs may be less stringent than in the past, but all such acquisitions remain subject to oversight by the relevant league, national governing bodies, and, depending on the transaction, government authorities under general foreign direct investment regulations. Notably, major rebranding, such as naming a club after a parent company, requires additional scrutiny and approval by the league in some sports like football and basketball.

Red Bull’s acquisition of Omiya Ardija signals a new era in Japanese football, with the conglomerate set to apply its international expertise and marketing strategies to the Japanese context. While the move diversifies club capital and promises greater international exposure, it also highlights the need for careful adaptation to local rules—especially those on branding and fan engagement.

Fan Ownership and Community Models

Japan has experimented with fan-owned clubs, although these remain rare compared to corporate structures. One prominent case is Yokohama FC, created by supporters who opposed a club merger in the late 1990s, and run according to a membership model. However, most Japanese fan-ownership schemes do not grant full managerial or voting rights typical in some European “socio” clubs, and sustaining such models at scale has proven difficult. Actually, the majority of shares in Yokohama FC is now held by a commercial company. Community-influenced ownership, where local businesses and governments have a stake, is more common in smaller clubs and regional leagues—to name a few examples, Montedio Yamagata, a professional football team competing in the J2 division, is owned by a company incorporated by Yamagata prefecture and local companies, or Akita Northern Happinets, a professional basketball team which was established in Akita prefecture with the vision to promote Akita prefecture globally, is supported substantially by companies located in Akita.

Licensing Requirements and Governance

For example, participation in Japan’s professional football leagues requires clubs to obtain an annual license, a system modeled on European standards but adapted locally. Key features include:

• Eligibility Criteria: Clubs must meet financial, legal, infrastructure, administrative, and sporting benchmarks. There are five standards and around 60 specific items, each graded by importance (A, B, or C). Fulfilling all “A” criteria is mandatory to obtain a license.
• Independent Oversight: Third-party bodies assess club applications for J1 and J2, while appeals processes further ensure fairness.
• Ongoing Compliance: Licenses are reviewed and renewed each year, with clubs required to demonstrate continued adherence to regulations covering stadium quality, youth development, club finances, and transparency.

Similar licensing system is introduced in the Japanese professional basketball league, B. League.

Governance Codes

Recent years have seen the Japan Sports Agency introduce governance codes—one for national sport federation members, another for general sports organisation members—providing general principles to be complied with by those members and aiming to enhance transparency, accountability, and compliance, with periodic reviews and audits.

Conclusion

Japan regulates the ownership and governance of professional sports clubs through a mix of annual licensing, governance codes, and oversight bodies, ensuring robust standards for transparency and club management. While traditionally favouring corporate and community models, the country is gradually opening to more substantial foreign investment—evident in the landmark Red Bull purchase of Omiya Ardija. Foreign ownership, however, remains a carefully managed process requiring compliance with both league-specific and general investment regulations. Fan and community ownership, while less common, still plays a role in shaping club identity. Overall, this layered system balances safeguarding local sporting culture with emerging global trends in sports club ownership and governance.

Growth of Multi-Sport and Multi-Club Ownership

The Red Bull Case: A New Era in Japanese Football

Red Bull’s 2024 acquisition of a Japanese professional football club, Omiya Ardija, stands out as a milestone in Japanese professional sports, marking the first time a foreign entity has taken 100% ownership of a domestic top-flight team. Red Bull is known internationally for its global network of football clubs—including RB Leipzig in Germany, FC Red Bull Salzburg in Austria, New York Red Bulls in the United States, and Red Bull Bragantino in Brazil—and deploys a multi-club ownership (MCO) model that leverages talent development, international branding, and interconnected management strategies. By adding Omiya Ardija to its portfolio, Red Bull is expected to introduce advanced know-how in sports management, player development, and commercial growth, fostering stronger linkages between its clubs worldwide.

Broader Trends: Is Multi-Sport Ownership Rising in Japan?

Compared to Europe and the US, multi-sport ownership (where a single group owns clubs or franchises across different sports) is still rare in Japan. Historically, Japanese companies sponsored or owned single teams as brand ambassadors in sports like baseball, soccer, basketball and volleyball, but rarely extended their holdings to multiple disciplines simultaneously. However, the past decade has seen the emergence of:

• Cross-sport investments by conglomerates: Some Japanese corporations maintain teams in several sports, typically as separate subsidiaries or sponsorship ventures rather than as an integrated ownership bundle; for example, DeNA, a conglomerate doing game, internet and other businesses, holds a baseball team, basketball club and football club, Rakuten, a conglomerate doing ecommerce, telecommunications and other businesses, holds a baseball team and football club. Also, historically, some Japanese large companies have had works teams, which are amateur sports teams within the company. In these works teams, the players are usually employed by the company (not by the team), and they are not professionals. For example, Toyota, a Japanese leading automotive company, has amateur baseball, athletic and speed skating teams, as well as professional football and basketball clubs.
• Rising multi-club ownership within football: The City Football Group, which includes Manchester City in England, also has a minority investment in a Japanese football club, Yokohama F. Marinos; although this remains less influential than Red Bull’s full takeover of Omiya Ardija. Also, ONODERA GROUP, which holds a Japanese football club, Yokohama FC, acquired UD Oliveirense SAD in Portugal in 2022.
• Growing investor interest: The ongoing professionalization of leagues, such as B. League (the professional basketball league) and baseball’s independent leagues, is attracting new investment funds and business groups considering holdings in more than one team or sport.

Nevertheless, multi-sport ownership across unrelated disciplines (for example, a company owning both a basketball and a football team) remains the exception rather than the rule—unlike in some Western markets.

Regulatory Framework and Recent Developments

The regulatory climate is gradually accommodating more diverse ownership models, especially as the J.League (Japanese professional football league) and other leagues seek to enhance financial stability and international competitiveness. Notably:

• Restrictions that once limited foreign or multi-club ownership have relaxed in recent years. The J. League removed its requirement that majority shares be held by domestic entities in 2020, enabling deals like Red Bull’s purchase of Omiya Ardija.
• League approval is usually required for any change in club ownership or club name in many professional sports leagues to ensure fair competition and compliance.
• In the J. League, it used to be prohibited to use the company name for the club’s name, but the regulations were changed, and the clubs can use the company name since the 2025 season. In the B. League it is not prohibited to use the company name for the club’s name, although only a few clubs include the company names in their club names. Historically, the professional baseball teams have included their owner company names in their team name, like Yokohama DeNA Baystars.

Recent M&A activities and rising values of Japanese sports clubs signal positive investor sentiment and broader acceptance of cross-club and potentially cross-sport ownership structures.

Conclusion

Japan is witnessing the early stages of a shift toward greater multi-club and potentially multi-sport ownership, highlighted by Red Bull’s headline-making acquisition of Omiya Ardija. While such ownership models are firmly established in some global markets, they remain relatively new in Japan, with football leading the change and other sports slowly following. Regulatory reforms and a more open attitude towards foreign and diversified investment are paving the way for further developments. For international investors and sports fans, the Omiya Ardija deal is emblematic of new opportunities and challenges ahead, as Japan’s sporting and business cultures embark on an era of deeper globalization and market integration.

National Provisions Governing Athlete Representation

General Legal Structure and Contract Types

Japan does not have a single, mandatory national statute solely dedicated to athlete agent regulation. The athletes contracts can be categorized as follows, and representation in each category is generally regulated by the regulations issued by the domestic or international governing body:

• Employment Contracts: Athletes employed by companies (a common model for amateur athletes in Japan) receive standard labour protections under the Japanese labour laws.
• Professional Athlete Contracts: Professional athletes usually contract with their club or team as independent contractors, and in this case, contractual freedom prevails, subject to general civil and commercial code principles.
• Sponsorship Contracts: When athletes endorse brands, contractual freedom prevails, subject to general civil and commercial code principles. Exclusive agreements are common.
• Affiliation Agreements: It is a kind of sponsorship contracts, but it is unique to Japan and allows athletes to be “affiliated” with a company (i.e., more strong relationship than sponsorship)—promoting its brand without necessarily being a formal employee. Such contracts often contain exclusivity clauses but are still bound by general contract law principles.

However, agents representing athletes or clubs may be subject to restrictions under the Attorneys Act, which prohibits the provision of legal services by non-attorneys (Article 72 of the Attorneys Act). In relation to this point, it is viewed that in the course of normal business operation, routine negotiations aimed at concluding a contract do not raise issues under this Article, but if litigation arise concerning that contract, issues under this Article may arise, and it is considered unlawful for a person without legal qualifications to continue acting as an agent.

Dual Representation and Agent Commission Caps

There is no specific national statutory provision in Japan directly limiting dual representation (where an agent represents both athlete and club) or setting maximum commission rates for agents. Instead, these matters are typically regulated by contractual agreement or—especially in sports with established national governing bodies—by sporting association regulations and codes of conduct.

For internationally governed sports like football and basketball, Japanese leagues and associations often adopt or harmonize with international rules. For example, if FIFA or FIBA imposes agent fee caps or prohibits dual representation, these restrictions would apply through federation rules, not by direct national law.

Protection of Minor Athletes at Contract Formation

While there is no dedicated statute regulating athlete representation for minors (such as requiring special licensing for agents dealing with minors or capping agent fees for under-18 athletes), the recent legal reforms obligate sporting bodies, schools, and companies to take proactive steps to protect minors—including better monitoring of agreements, parental involvement, and education on rights and well-being.

Under the Japanese Civil Code, the age of majority is 18 years of age (Article 4 of the Civil Code). A minor must obtain the consent of the minor’s legal representative (which is usually a parent) to perform a juridical act, and a juridical act conducted without the said consent is voidable (Article 5 of the Civil Code). Therefore, if, for example, a minor asks a representation to an agent without his/her parent, the representation can be cancelled.

Conclusion

While Japan does not currently impose mandatory national laws specifically regulating agent commissions, dual representation, or the representation of minor athletes outside of international sporting federation requirements, several important safeguards are provided by the general statutes. General contract and labour laws provide baseline protections. The landscape remains a mix of tradition, international harmonization, and incremental reform; for foreign agents and athletes wishing to navigate the Japanese system, close attention to both contractual details and evolving social expectations is crucial. As the sector continues to globalize, it is expected that further statutory regulation will emerge to address gaps in agent conduct and athlete protection, especially for minors and vulnerable groups.

National Statutory Frameworks in Japan

Legislative Landscape

As of September 2025, Japan does not have a comprehensive national statutory framework specifically addressing the participation of transgender athletes in sport. Unlike some jurisdictions that have passed explicit laws or civil codes concerning transgender participation and rights in sports, Japan primarily relies on general anti-discrimination provisions in international treaties and, in some municipalities, local ordinances protecting LGBTQ+ individuals.

• The national government has not passed a dedicated anti-discrimination law based on gender identity or sexual orientation. Efforts to enact such a law ahead of the Tokyo Olympics garnered significant advocacy but have not resulted in statutory change at the national level. The LGBT Understanding Promotion Act, enacted in June 2023, is primarily declaratory in nature, aiming to promote awareness and understanding rather than to impose binding obligations. Although it introduces a duty of effort to prevent unjust discrimination, it does not establish a comprehensive prohibition accompanied by enforceable legal sanctions. Accordingly, the statute is generally assessed as lacking strict legal force.
• The Tokyo metropolitan government stands as an exception, having adopted an ordinance in 2018 safeguarding LGBTQ+ people from discrimination in line with the Olympic Charter. However, this protection only applies within Tokyo. In 2021, Mie Prefecture enacted an ordinance prohibiting “outing,” which involves disclosing an individual’s sexual orientation or gender identity to third parties without their consent.
• International human rights treaties ratified by Japan obligate the government to protect against discrimination in principle but do not directly regulate sports participation.

Sports Governing Bodies and Guidelines

In practice, athlete eligibility for transgender athletes in Japan is largely governed by international sporting federation rules and, increasingly, domestic sporting organisations’ guidelines which align with those standards:

• International Olympic Committee (IOC) Framework: The IOC’s evolving stance since the “Stockholm Consensus” (2004) and, more recently, its 2021-2022 framework, directs sports federations to set their own criteria for transgender athlete eligibility, emphasizing evidence-based fairness, inclusion, and non-discrimination.
• Japanese Sporting Federations: The Japan Triathlon Union, reference or adapt international standards—including requirements relating to gender identity declaration, hormone (testosterone) limits, and transition timelines. Actual case management is left to individual sporting associations, and standards may vary across disciplines.
• Case Examples: At the Tokyo 2020 Olympics, transgender athletes competed for the first time under these frameworks.

Current Regulation and Ongoing Debate

Regulation in Practice

No national, uniform eligibility law exists for transgender athletes; federations and event organizers interpret or set their own policies based on international guidelines and medical standards.

Typical requirements for trans women athletes in sport can include a declaration of gender identity, suppression of testosterone levels below specified thresholds (e.g., 2.5 nmol/L in some disciplines), and a transition period before eligibility for competition.

Protections against discrimination remain incomplete except in places like Tokyo, underscoring the patchwork nature of legal safeguards for transgender athletes at present.

The National and International Debate

Debate in Japan intensified after Tokyo 2020, prompted by visibility of openly transgender athletes and international discourse. This has produced increasing discussion among athletes, federations, media, and the public, often focusing on balancing inclusivity and fairness in women’s sports, the scientific basis of current policies, and human rights perspectives.

Most of Japanese sporting bodies await clearer scientific or international consensus before adopting policies. There remain calls for broader anti-discrimination statutes at the national level, and cases of individual transgender athletes are typically addressed on a sport-by-sport basis.

Ongoing education, consultation, and expert-led seminars have helped broaden awareness, though challenges persist around social acceptance, stigma, and achieving policy consistency.

Conclusion

Japan currently lacks a national law specifically regulating the participation of transgender athletes in competitive sport, and instead relies on a combination of local ordinances (notably in Tokyo), international guidelines (especially from the IOC), and sport-specific policies set by domestic federations. The issue is the subject of increasing debate and ongoing policy development, spurred by Japan’s engagement with global sporting events and evolving international norms. Efforts by advocacy organisations and some local governments aim toward broader legal protection against discrimination, but as of 2025, regulation remains fragmented and sport-dependent—with the path forward expected to reflect continued dialogue and gradual institutional adaptation.

Are There Specific Statutes or Codes for E-sports in Japan?

As of 2025, Japan has not adopted a single, comprehensive statute or code dedicated purely to e-sports. Instead, the legal landscape is constructed from a combination of general laws, regulations inherited from traditional gaming and entertainment, and voluntary industry initiatives:

No standalone E-sports legislation: There is no explicit “E-sports Law.” Tournaments, teams, and facilities are instead managed under general laws originally designed for gaming, amusement businesses, and the regulation of gambling and misleading advertising.

Regulation under existing statutes: Several established statutes play a direct or indirect role in governing e-sports:

• The Act on Control and Improvement of Amusement Business (Amusement Businesses Law): Regulates arcades and e-sports venues, especially regarding age restrictions, business hours, and the use of gaming equipment.
• Penal Code (Gambling Law): Prohibits gambling, raising legal questions about prize money and entry fees for tournaments. Organizers must carefully structure competitions to ensure they do not violate betting or gaming prohibitions.
• Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations Act: Limits the value of premiums (e.g., prize money) and prohibits misleading advertising related to tournaments.
• Copyright Law: Protects video and audio from games as “cinematographic works.”; organizers must secure licenses from game publishers for public display or streaming of gameplay.

Institutional Framework and Industry Initiatives

Given the fragmented legal context, industry groups have stepped in to foster professionalism and regulatory clarity:

• Japanese Esports Union (JeSU): Formed in 2018, JeSU functions as the quasi-governing body for the sector, bridging the gap between legal restrictions and industry needs. JeSU has introduced a professional licensing system for players, which allows recognized “pro gamers” to receive higher prize money legally.
• Guidelines for Events: JeSU has created guidelines to help tournament organizers navigate compliance—such as not using participation fees as the source of prize money, thereby avoiding reclassification as gambling or setting the participation fee to be less than or equal to the total event setup costs divided by the maximum number of participants, thereby avoiding falling under stricter amusement business regulations.

Policy Discussions and Prospects for Reform

As of August 2025, there are no motions in the Japanese parliament to introduce a unified e-sports statute.:

• Adjusting gambling law interpretations to better suit e-sports’ competitive nature.
• Enabling fair prize structures that support professionalization.
• Improving coordination among various government ministries and agencies overseeing different aspects of the digital and gaming industries.

Ongoing Challenges and Compliance Considerations

Tournament organizers, gaming venues, and e-sports teams in Japan must deal with several recurring legal hurdles:

• Prize Money Restrictions: Without proper licensing, large cash prizes may be deemed to violate the Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations Act. JeSU player licenses offer an exemption for officially recognized events.
• Venue and Age Restrictions: E-sports facilities must comply with business licensing regulations, youth protection ordinances, and local police guidance, especially when offering tournaments with cash prizes or open access to minors.
• Copyright and IP Licensing: Use of game software in competitive settings mandates negotiation with copyright holders, making legal compliance a vital (and sometimes complex) part of tournament organisation.
• No Legalized E-sports Betting: E-sports betting remains illegal under the Penal Code, alongside most forms of gaming and wagering.

Conclusion

Japan’s e-sports industry operates without a dedicated law or code, relying on a complex intersection of existing amusement, gaming, and copyright laws, as well as self-regulatory practices initiated by industry groups like JeSU. While the lack of a unified statute presents challenges—especially for prize structures, professional development, and venue operation—policy debates seek to support the industry’s growth while protecting consumers and upholding public order. For foreign organizers, investors, or fans, understanding this multifaceted legal landscape is key to navigating—and succeeding in—Japan’s vibrant, but tightly regulated, e-sports sector.

The Leading Sports Law Case: WADA v. JADA & Masaki Toyoda (2024)

A leading sports law case in Japan over the past year was the dispute between the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), the Japan Anti-Doping Agency (JADA), and the athlete Masaki Toyoda, a national-level 400m hurdler. This case not only moved through Japan’s domestic system but also reached the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), highlighting the interconnectedness of Japanese, international, and Olympic legal standards.

Case Background and Development

In June 2022, Masaki Toyoda tested positive for a banned substance after competing in the Japan Championships.

Upon notification, Toyoda was provisionally suspended by JADA and underwent a “B” sample analysis.

JADA imposed a two-year sanction and disqualified his results during the period in question.

Dissatisfied with the severity of the penalty, JADA appealed to the Japan Sports Arbitration Agency (JSAA) seeking a four-year ban. The JSAA dismissed the appeal, upholding Toyoda’s two-year sanction.

WADA then appealed the case to the CAS in 2024, arguing that the four-year ban should be imposed to align with international anti-doping standards. The dispute focused on the intent behind the anti-doping violation, proportionality of sanctions, and harmonization of national and international codes.

On May 28, 2025, the CAS arbitration panel issued a decision dismissing WADA’s appeal.

Key Legal Questions

Did Toyoda’s conduct fulfill the stricter criteria of intent required for a four-year ban under the Japan Anti-Doping Code and World Anti-Doping Code?

How should appeals and evidence be managed under Japan’s hybrid model of domestic arbitration and international oversight?

What is the appropriate balance between athlete rights, procedural fairness, and the need for rigorous anti-doping enforcement?

Case Impact

The case clarified how Japanese tribunals interpret “not intentional” anti-doping violations, demonstrating a commitment to due process and international alignment.

It reinforced the authority of JSAA in first-instance decisions, while also allowing for oversight by WADA and CAS.

The proceedings set important procedural standards for evidence gathering and legal representation in Japanese sports disputes.

It highlighted Japan’s ongoing role in the global anti-doping movement, showing both the strengths and the scrutiny faced by its regulatory bodies.

Conclusion

The WADA v. JADA & Masaki Toyoda case exemplifies how Japan’s sports dispute resolution framework—comprising domestic arbitration through the JSAA and subsequent international review by the CAS—functions in practice. It demonstrates the Japanese legal system’s evolving capacity to address complex sporting disputes at both national and international levels. It underscores Japan’s dual commitment to fairness for athletes and the uncompromising pursuit of clean sport, with procedures designed to stand up to international review. For Japan’s sporting community and legal observers worldwide, the case represents a significant step in aligning domestic sports law with international standards.

Current and Relevant Issues in Japanese Sports Law

1. Athlete Mental Health and Welfare Regulations

With mounting international attention to the psychological pressures faced by athletes, Japan has witnessed a surge in initiatives aimed at protecting athlete mental health and promoting well-being. The aftermath of high-profile cases—both domestic and global—has prompted the Japan Sports Agency and Ministry of Education (MEXT) to implement measures to eradicate violence and harassment in sports, including establishing a centralized consultation window for such issues. In June 2025, the Basic Act on Sport was amended to strengthen the legal framework addressing violence, power harassment, and sexual harassment in the context of athletic instruction. Pursuant to the amendment, the national and local governments are mandated to implement measures to prevent acts of abuse arising from the superior position of coaches. In addition, sports organisations are expressly required to make diligent efforts to establish and enforce corresponding preventive measures.

2. Safe Sport and Abuse Prevention

Following international trends and local scandals, “Safe Sport” remains a noteworthy topic in Japan. Recent efforts focus not only on preventing physical abuse, but also addressing sexual harassment, bullying, and broader safeguarding needs across all levels of sport—from professional leagues to school teams. The challenge lies in harmonizing these standards nationwide and ensuring consistent enforcement, especially in traditional or less-visible disciplines.

3. Gender Equity and Women’s Participation

Legal and policy debates around gender equity continue to gain momentum, beyond the domain of athlete representation or transgender participation. Actions include expanding funding and access for women’s sports, elevating women to leadership positions in federations and governing bodies, and closing pay and opportunity gaps. Ongoing policy discussions point toward possible statutory requirements for representation of women on executive boards, aiming to comply with both national priorities and global standards such as those promoted by the IOC.

4. Data Privacy and Athlete Biometrics

As sports technology, analytics, and wearable devices proliferate, the handling of athlete data has become a legal issue. Biometric information such as physical data and biometric data constitutes personal information under Japan’s broader data protection law (the Act on the Protection of Personal Information), and sporting bodies are increasingly expected to develop their own, sport-specific codes for digital data governance.

5. Environmental Sustainability and Green Sports Law

Japan’s government and sports organisations now prioritize environmental measures, especially ahead of hosting events or building new infrastructure. Regulations concerning eco-friendly stadium requirements, sustainable event management, and reduction of carbon footprints are being strengthened. .

Conclusion

Athlete mental health, safe sport frameworks, gender equity, data privacy, and environmental sustainability are now beginning to be widely debated domestically. These topics underscore Japan’s commitment to addressing not only traditional legal challenges, but also the complex, inter-connected issues of the 21st century sporting world. For stakeholders and foreign observers alike, keeping abreast of these emerging areas is critical for understanding—and thriving within—Japan’s evolving and increasingly influential sporting environment.