Home / News / Urgent Appeals / SOUTH KOREA: Conscripted policeman ill-treated after expressing opinion on the internet

SOUTH KOREA: Conscripted policeman ill-treated after expressing opinion on the internet

August 1, 2008

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal Case: AHRC-UAC-175-2008

1 August 2008
---------------------------------------------------------------------
SOUTH KOREA: Conscripted policeman ill-treated after expressing opinion on the internet

ISSUES: Ill treatment; assault; freedom of opinion and expression
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information about a young conscripted man who has served as a battle policeman. He has been repeatedly ill-treated by way of disciplinary punishment. This started after he expressed his opinion on the internet, and after asking for a change in his position, on 12 June 2008, to serve in the army.  He was hospitalized as the result of his hunger strike. However, he received another disciplinary punishment for not fulfilling his duty during his hunger strike.

CASE DETAILS:

Mr. Lee Gye-Deok was conscripted on 5 February, 2007 and started serving in the army. On April 12, he was transferred to the battle police operating to arrest a spy.

He requested to be returned to his position in the regular army. The roles of the battle police he viewed with regret. For example, maintenance of clean police stations, drivers for senior police officers, in particular assignment to demonstrations regardless of one's political opinion or conscience. He made this request to the Commissioner of the National Police Agency and the Minister of Defense on June 12, 2008. He then expressed his opinion on the internet.

While on holiday for two days from June 16, he asked for a meeting with the Commissioner of the National Police Agency by publicly writing an article on the internet. When he returned on June 17, he noticed that all of his colleagues appeared to be writing down many things. Questioning what was going on, one of his colleagues told him that they were ordered to note down any of his behavior relating to neglect of duty or illegal activities.

On June 24, he was detained in a military cell for 15 days, the charge being neglect of duty and disobeying an order.  After detention, on July 8 and 12, he was assaulted by senior colleagues. Subsequently, he received verbal threats from the Commander of 606 battle police of the Yong San Police Station, that he would receive disciplinary punishment as he was responsible for inducing the assault.

He finally received formal disciplinary punishment. He was denied meeting anyone except his relatives and legal counsel, using the internet or leaving the place for 2 months beginning July 9. He went on a hunger strike, not taking even a drop of water, protesting this unjust disciplinary punishment. His health deteriorated drastically, he became utterly exhausted spitting up blood. He finally became unconscious and was hospitalized on July 16. After recovering, he returned to the battle police on July 20. However, when he was hospitalized he was unable to perform his regular duties and for this, he received a second disciplinary detention punishment for 15 days on August 1.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION:

The system of battle police has its roots in the Korean War. The Act on Establishment of Battle Police was enacted on 31 December 1970 to suppress partisans left behind in South Korea during the War. The Act was amended on 31 December 1975 and the mission of the battle police was expanded to operations against spies and assistance to professional police in public security. However, the members of the battle police had been dispatched to places where anti-government demonstrations or labor strikes were taking place. In order to respond to the increasing numbers of assemblies and demonstrations, in1983, when the people suffered under a military dictatorship government, the Act was once again amended and a system of Auxiliary Police was added.

According to the Korean Constitution, it is the duty of every man to serve in the army. Some young men, conscripted, are randomly recruited as members of the battle police. If men are on the waiting list to start their service and thus complete their compulsory duty of national defense and do not want the army but the police, they can apply to become a member of the Auxiliary Police. Finishing a term is considered to be the completion of one's duty of national defense. However, these young men, from two systems, have been dispatched to suppress demonstrators protesting against the government or government policy.

Four out of nine members from the Korean Constitutional Court expressed, as a minority opinion in 1995 that dispatching the battle police to suppress demonstrators did breach a duty of national defense according to article 39 (1) and (2) of the Korean Constitution.

Several reports found that these young men suffered because of sleep deprivation, poor quality rations and long, heavy-duty labor, which breaches the article on forcible labor of the International Labor Organization. Furthermore, their freedom of conscience has been seriously violated. They are obliged to follow orders from their commanders (professional police officers) to assault unarmed, civilian demonstrators, with police shields and batons and forcibly disperse them.

SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please send a letter to the government authorities listed below. Urge them to return Lee to a position in the regular army and not in the battle police. He can then finish his term without being considered a criminal.

Please be informed that the AHRC has also sent a separate letter to the UN Special Rapporteur on the Question of Torture and freedom of opinion and expression, calling for immediate action in this matter.

To support this appeal, please click here:
 
SAMPLE LETTER:

Dear _______,

SOUTH KOREA: Conscripted policeman receives ill-treatment after expressing  his opinion on the internet

Details of victim: Mr. Lee (Full name withheld for security reasons), 21 years old; conscripted on 5 February 2007; serving with the battle police from12 April 2007; received 15 days of military detention on 24 June 2008 for expressing his opinion on the internet and in addition to being assaulted by his colleagues; received several days of  additional military detention after his hospitalisation due to his hunger strike, disobeying an order and not performing his duties; currently serving  his duty of national defence at 606 company under Yong San Police Station

I am writing to express my deep concern regarding the repeated ill-treatment of a young man. This occurred after he expressed his opinion, through the internet, on the mobilisation of colleagues, forcibly located to a place where people had held assemblies and demonstrations since May.

According to the information that I have received, Mr. Lee received disciplinary punishment of 15 days of military detention on 24 June 2008 after expressing his opinion through the internet where he asked for return to the army service from the Commissioner of National Police Agency.  After he returned to the police station, he was assaulted by his senior colleagues who were also conscripts. Other punishments imposed on him were denial of access to the internet, communication by letter and meeting people except his relatives and legal counsellor.

From Information I have learned, he went on a hunger strike due to this repeated ill –treatment.  He even went without drinking water for 4 days and was finally hospitalised on July 12 due to his deteriorated health. However, when he returned after being discharged from hospital, he received verbal threats that another punishment of military detention would be given for not fulfilling his regular duties while in hospital. He finally received another period of detention on August 1.

I am deeply concerned that this repeated punishment has been taken against him after he asked for relocation of his post. His hospitalisation could also be the reason for further disciplinary action. If a person is conscripted according to the Korean Constitution, it is the duty of the government to facilitate his position in order for him to finish his term.

I therefore urge you to transfer him back to the army as he wishes. He can finish his term and not be discriminated against by society. I also urge you to lift the disciplinary punishment against him and that he not be further harassed or discriminated against by his colleagues in the battle police. I further urge you to stop using disciplinary punishment as a way to harass a person who expresses his opinion.

I would like to draw your attention to the more general fact that the young men, after being conscripted, are recruited to the battle police and have been mobilised to suppress demonstrators, which breaches domestic law. In addition, even though the main mission of the young men from the auxiliary police, also conscripted, is to assist the professional police officer, they have nevertheless been mobilised, not to assist the work of professional police but to play a main role in repressing demonstrators. In this regard, I finally call upon you to abolish these two systems in order that these young people will not be victimised any more.

Yours sincerely,
__________________
PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTERS TO:

1. Mr. Baik Dong-san
Senior Superintendent of Police
Yong San Police Station
12-12, Wonhyoro 1-ga,
Yongsan-gu, Seoul
REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Fax: +82 2 714 0117
Tel: +82 2 713 0121
E-mail: yspolice@police.go.kr 

2. Mr. Eo Cheong-soo
Commissioner General
Korean National Police Agnecy
209 Migeun-dong
Seodaemun-gu, Seoul
REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Fax: +82 2 365 5797
Tel: +82 2 363 0112
E-mail: cnpa100@police.go.kr 

3. Mr. Won Sei-hoon
Minister
Ministry of Public Administration and Security
Central Government Complex
55 Sejong-no (77-6 Sejong-no 1ga)
Jongno-gu
Seoul, 110-760
REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Fax: +82 2 2100 4001
Tel: +82 2 2100 3000
E-mail: webmaster@mopas.go.kr 

4. Mr. Lee Sang-hee
Minister
Ministry of National Defense
Youngsan-dong 3 Ga, Youngsan-gu
Seoul, (140-701)
REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Fax: +82 2 748 6895
Tel: +82 2 748 1111
E-mail: cyber@mnd.go.kr 

5. Mr. Kim Kyung-Han
Minister
Ministry of Justice
88 Gwanmon-ro, Gwachon-si
Gyonggi Province 427-760
REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Fax: +82 2 2110 3079 / 503 7046
E-mail: webmaster@moj.go.kr 

6. Mr. Lee Myeng-Bak
President
1 Sejong-no, Jongno-gu
Seoul 110-820
REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Fax: +82 2 770 4751
Tel: +82 2 770 0018
E-mail: foreign@president.go.kr or president@cwd.go.kr or president@president.go.kr 

7. Mr. Ahn Kyong-Whan
Chairperson
National Human Rights Commission
16 Euljiro 1-ga
Jung-gu
Seoul 100-842
REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Fax: +82 2 2125 9812 / 2125 9666
Tel: +82 2 2125 9700
E-mail: nhrc@humanrights.go.kr 

Thank you.

Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (ua@ahrchk.org)

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
AHRC-UAC-175-2008
Countries :
Issues :
Document Actions
Share |
Subscribe to our Mailing List
Follow AHRC
Extended Introduction: Urgent Appeals, theory and practice

A need for dialogue

Many people across Asia are frustrated by the widespread lack of respect for human rights in their countries.  Some may be unhappy about the limitations on the freedom of expression or restrictions on privacy, while some are affected by police brutality and military killings.  Many others are frustrated with the absence of rights on labour issues, the environment, gender and the like. 

Yet the expression of this frustration tends to stay firmly in the private sphere.  People complain among friends and family and within their social circles, but often on a low profile basis. This kind of public discourse is not usually an effective measure of the situation in a country because it is so hard to monitor. 

Though the media may cover the issues in a broad manner they rarely broadcast the private fears and anxieties of the average person.  And along with censorship – a common blight in Asia – there is also often a conscious attempt in the media to reflect a positive or at least sober mood at home, where expressions of domestic malcontent are discouraged as unfashionably unpatriotic. Talking about issues like torture is rarely encouraged in the public realm.

There may also be unwritten, possibly unconscious social taboos that stop the public reflection of private grievances.  Where authoritarian control is tight, sophisticated strategies are put into play by equally sophisticated media practices to keep complaints out of the public space, sometimes very subtly.  In other places an inner consensus is influenced by the privileged section of a society, which can control social expression of those less fortunate.  Moral and ethical qualms can also be an obstacle.

In this way, causes for complaint go unaddressed, un-discussed and unresolved and oppression in its many forms, self perpetuates.  For any action to arise out of private frustration, people need ways to get these issues into the public sphere.

Changing society

In the past bridging this gap was a formidable task; it relied on channels of public expression that required money and were therefore controlled by investors.  Printing presses were expensive, which blocked the gate to expression to anyone without money.  Except in times of revolution the media in Asia has tended to serve the well-off and sideline or misrepresent the poor.

Still, thanks to the IT revolution it is now possible to communicate with large audiences at little cost.  In this situation there is a real avenue for taking issues from private to public, regardless of the class or caste of the individual.

Practical action

The AHRC Urgent Appeals system was created to give a voice to those affected by human rights violations, and by doing so, to create a network of support and open avenues for action.  If X’s freedom of expression is denied, if Y is tortured by someone in power or if Z finds his or her labour rights abused, the incident can be swiftly and effectively broadcast and dealt with. The resulting solidarity can lead to action, resolution and change. And as more people understand their rights and follow suit, as the human rights consciousness grows, change happens faster. The Internet has become one of the human rights community’s most powerful tools.   

At the core of the Urgent Appeals Program is the recording of human rights violations at a grass roots level with objectivity, sympathy and competence. Our information is firstly gathered on the ground, close to the victim of the violation, and is then broadcast by a team of advocates, who can apply decades of experience in the field and a working knowledge of the international human rights arena. The flow of information – due to domestic restrictions – often goes from the source and out to the international community via our program, which then builds a pressure for action that steadily makes its way back to the source through his or her own government.   However these cases in bulk create a narrative – and this is most important aspect of our program. As noted by Sri Lankan human rights lawyer and director of the Asian Human Rights Commission, Basil Fernando:

"The urgent appeal introduces narrative as the driving force for social change. This idea was well expressed in the film Amistad, regarding the issue of slavery. The old man in the film, former president and lawyer, states that to resolve this historical problem it is very essential to know the narrative of the people. It was on this basis that a court case is conducted later. The AHRC establishes the narrative of human rights violations through the urgent appeals. If the narrative is right, the organisation will be doing all right."

Patterns start to emerge as violations are documented across the continent, allowing us to take a more authoritative, systemic response, and to pinpoint the systems within each country that are breaking down. This way we are able to discover and explain why and how violations take place, and how they can most effectively be addressed. On this path, larger audiences have opened up to us and become involved: international NGOs and think tanks, national human rights commissions and United Nations bodies.  The program and its coordinators have become a well-used tool for the international media and for human rights education programs. All this helps pave the way for radical reforms to improve, protect and to promote human rights in the region.