Historically Japanese attorneys were understood to function outside the government, and compared to judges and prosecutors they occupied a lower position but one with the potential to be more independent. The government control exerted prior to and during WWII had a long-lasting impact on Japanese attorneys, motivating the bar to retain its independence despite high costs over many years. The prioritization of independence is particularly evident in the somewhat unusual adoption of mandatory ‘public interest’ activities by the larger bar associations in Tokyo and other major cities. The chapter examines the process of making and revising mandatory rules, and argues that the divergence of views regarding what constitutes ‘public interest activities’ suggests that mandatory rules serve multiple purposes, not necessarily related to access to justice. The chapter also suggests a four-part typology to examine the different public interest activities which attorneys in Japan carry out: (1) professional work, paid and unpaid, undertaken for those unable to afford it; (2) criminal and civil legal aid paid for with public funds; (3) activities for bar associations; and (4) other activities recognized by bar associations as public interest activities even though they do not utilize legal skills.