Expelled for Probing Missing Funds—Ex-Director Exposes Kansai Economic Club Turmoil

Unprecedented expulsion at a long-established organization

The author has in hand a club bulletin featuring smiling photographs of prominent lawmakers from both ruling and opposition parties, along with their New Year’s greetings. Even looking at the past four years, the lineup includes notable figures such as Kenta Izumi (50), former leader of the Constitutional Democratic Party, and Motohisa Furukawa (59), deputy representative of the Democratic Party for the People, from the opposition. From the ruling party, it includes former Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry Yasutoshi Nishimura (62) and Takayuki Kobayashi (50), known as “Kobahawk.”

The bulletin is published by an organization called the Osaka Economic Club, a general incorporated association headquartered in Nakano Ward, Tokyo.

Founded in Osaka in 1986, the club states on its website that its purpose is to organize networking events for people, including executives from government agencies and businesses. It primarily targets small and medium-sized business owners and hosts cross-industry networking events annually in Tokyo. The attendee lists from past regular meetings include not only legal heavyweights like former Prosecutor General Yusuke Yoshinaga (deceased) but also executives from Japan’s leading industries, such as major developers like Taisei Corporation and Obayashi Corporation, energy companies like Tokyo Electric Power and Tokyo Gas, and trading giants like Itochu Corporation and Mitsui & Co. It is truly a long-established organization with history and tradition.

However, this long-standing institution is now embroiled in an astonishing controversy, as revealed through this magazine’s investigation. What exactly is happening?

“Myself, Senior Executive Director A, and Advisor B—three of us were suddenly and unilaterally expelled from the club by Chairman X during a board meeting last September. The decision was made by Chairman X and his close associate, the vice chairman. We sent formal notices requesting an explanation for our expulsion, but received no reply. We also submitted a motion to demand their removal, but again, no response. Currently, the three of us are considering legal action to seek the revocation of our expulsion.”

Speaking with restrained anger, one of the three, Kaori Fujieda (45), a former director of the club, makes this revelation. Fujieda runs an osteopathy business in Tokyo. In December 2022, she met Chairman X through an acquaintance and was invited to join the board. A was also invited by Chairman X around the same time and became a director in January 2023, later being promoted to senior executive director in August of the same year. Together with B, who had long served as an advisor, the three played a crucial role in the club’s operations.

In fact, under their involvement, attendance at the club’s regular meetings—previously limited to a few dozen people—grew to over 100, thanks to their outreach efforts and personal networks.

Meetings are held in cafés, and the website remains outdated

The club’s regular meetings are open to the general public, with a participation fee of 10,000 yen per person. Membership requires an entrance fee and monthly dues. According to the club’s regulations, senior executive directors must pay an entrance fee of 100,000 yen and a monthly fee of 10,000 yen, directors must pay 50,000 yen and 5,000 yen respectively, and general members must pay an annual fee of 50,000 yen, including the entrance fee.

With the increase in participants, the club’s financial situation seemed to be improving or so it appeared. However, this success led to growing friction between Fujieda and Chairman X. Former senior executive director A, who spoke to the press, revealed the following:

“Neither Fujieda nor I received any salary from the club, and we also paid the participation fee for each regular meeting. When we were appointed as directors, we each paid the required 110,000 yen. Additionally, when I was promoted to senior executive director, I paid another 220,000 yen as required. Despite the apparent revenue, the club had no office, meetings were always held at a café in Shimbashi, board meetings were often conducted in rented conference rooms, and the website had not been updated for years.

When I asked Chairman X about the club’s financial situation, he stubbornly refused to disclose any details. As a senior executive director, I had the right to request financial transparency under the club’s regulations, yet my requests were consistently denied. The club’s finances were managed solely by the chairman and vice chairman, raising concerns about how it was being run.”

In an effort to ensure proper management, Fujieda and others repeatedly demanded an explanation of the club’s income and expenditures, but Chairman X never complied. To make the club’s financial records accessible to all, they even applied for a new online banking account. However, just as they were taking this step, the board decided to expel Fujieda and two others in September of last year.

Unwilling to accept this decision, Fujieda and the others sent a joint notice to Chairman X and the vice chairman in October, demanding the withdrawal of their expulsion. Fujieda continued:

“According to Article 13 of the club’s regulations, the expulsion of a director or member requires a two-thirds majority vote at the senior executive board meeting, prior notification to the concerned member, and an opportunity for the concerned member to present their case at the general meeting. However, no senior executive board meeting was held, nor were we given a chance to explain ourselves. To preserve evidence, we have officially submitted and certified notices, records from the board’s shared LINE group, and online banking account records at a notary office as public evidence.”

Chairman X personally answered the phone

Even beyond financial transparency, there is another unclear aspect—the actual relationship between the club and the members of the National Diet. The club holds three regular meetings annually, in February, July, and November. The invitations for these events list around a dozen Diet members as “guest invitees.” The most recent invitation for the February 20th meeting included the names of 15 lawmakers from both ruling and opposition parties, such as Kenta Izumi, Motohisa Furukawa, and Yasutoshi Nishimura.

Fujieda also raised concerns about this practice.

“Every invitation includes the names of numerous Diet members. When I first joined, Chairman X showed me the club’s newsletter and told me he had connections in the political and bureaucratic world, so I expected to be introduced to these lawmakers. However, I never once saw any prominent politician attend. If two or three lawmakers showed up, that was considered a good turnout, and there were plenty of times when none attended at all.

Furthermore, the February meeting was scheduled in the middle of the parliamentary session. Logically, it’s highly unlikely that well-known lawmakers would be able to attend. Yet their names were still listed, which suggests they were being used as advertising figures rather than actual participants. The relationship between the club and these politicians was likely not as deep as it appeared. Perhaps due to these circumstances becoming known, attendance at the meetings has reportedly been declining.”

How did Chairman X respond to these allegations from former board members? A press inquiry form was prepared, listing questions about the fact of expulsion, the reason for not holding a board meeting before the expulsion, the refusal to disclose financial statements despite requests, and the inclusion of numerous Diet members in the club’s newsletter, which former board members claim was merely for advertising purposes.

A call was placed to the club’s contact number, and Chairman X answered directly. Initially, he was calm, but upon hearing the word interview, he suddenly became flustered and interrupted the conversation, saying, “W-w-wait, I’ll call you back later, sorry,” before hastily ending the call. When informed that the press inquiry form would be sent via fax, he responded, “I’ll call you back later, okay, thanks, okay,” before cutting off the call unilaterally.

After that, the office phone became unreachable, and attempts to send the fax were met with repeated unable to send messages. The inquiry form was then sent to Chairman X’s email address, and a short message requesting an interview was also sent to his personal mobile phone. However, no response was received by the deadline.

In this long-established economic club, where prominent Diet members have continued to contribute New Year’s greetings, three former board members who had been at the heart of its activities were now prepared to take legal action against the organization’s leader. Such an insincere response, tarnishing over 30 years of history and tradition, should be reconsidered.