Does 総会屋 refer to only one person who extorts companies or does it refer to a group of people who are dedicated to extorting companies?

I'm translating the next sentence, and I have doubts about how to translate 総会屋.

► 自らが、暴力団員による不当な行為の防止等に関する法律第2条第二号に規定する暴力団、暴力団関係企業、総会屋若しくはこれらに準ずる者又はその構成員(以下総称して「反社会的勢力」という。)ではないこと。

My attempt:

► Not being a member or an associated party to an organized criminal group, a company related to organized criminal groups or a group engaged in extortion or blackmail of companies (sōkaiya) (hereinafter all considered as "antisocial forces") , in conformity with ...


1 Answer 1


総会屋 can refer to both a person and a group of people:



反社会的勢力 refers to both, too:



But in your sentence, 総会屋 is used as a group name because it's clearly used with other group names (暴力団, 暴力団関係企業), followed by 又はその構成員. If I read this correctly, this 自ら by itself can be either a person or an organization:

暴力団, 暴力団関係企業, 総会屋 and similar entities...

...or members of such entities

Note that 者 in legal contexts can refer to an organization. And where did "associated party" come from in your translation? I think neither これらに準ずる者 nor 構成員 means that.

  • Thank you so much for your answer! It helped a lot. The "associated party" came from my interpretation of これらに準ずる者, which now I realize it was wrong.
    – Rick
    Nov 20, 2020 at 16:02
  • What do you think of this translation? --> Not being an organized criminal group (bōryokudan), a company related to organized criminal groups, a group engaged in extortion or blackmail of companies (sōkaiya), or another similar entity, nor a member of such entities (hereinafter all considered as "antisocial forces"), in conformity with ...
    – Rick
    Nov 20, 2020 at 16:03
  • 1
    @Rick Looks much better to me now, but what does "in conformity with" correspond to?
    – naruto
    Nov 20, 2020 at 17:14
  • 1
    @Rick “As defined in 2条二号” should be the simplest but there may be a better way to say this in legal contexts...
    – naruto
    Nov 20, 2020 at 17:41
  • 2
    @Rick, FWIW, I'm accustomed to seeing "as stipulated by/in" or "as defined by/in" for に規定する, depending on context. Nov 20, 2020 at 18:06

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .