Home / News / Urgent Appeals / SOUTH KOREA: Arbitrary detention of a conscientious objector for disobedience
 

SOUTH KOREA: Arbitrary detention of a conscientious objector for disobedience

August 7, 2008

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal Case: AHRC-UAC-180-2008

8 August 2008
---------------------------------------------------------------------
SOUTH KOREA: Arbitrary detention of a conscientious objector for disobedience

ISSUES: Arbitrary detention; deprivation of liberty; ill treatment; conscientious objection; freedom of conscience; forced conscription
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information that a conscripted young man who objected to military service based on his conscience on 27 July 2008, received an order four times to join in order to disperse protestors, which he has refused. Based on this fact, the prosecutor who pleaded for an arrest warrant with detention, which was earlier dismissed, has again pleaded for it and the detention of the young man has been decided.

CASE DETAILS:

Mr. Lee Gil-jun, 24 years old, held a press conference at 7pm on 27 July 2008 and declared that he objected serving as an auxiliary police - a type of duty of national defense. He received a special holiday for three days due to his duty to suppress people taking part in the candlelit rallies.

He claims in his statement that he received orders from his commander to hit protestors with the shield and batons, in order to disperse them during recent ongoing protest. He had to return to Jung Lang Police Station, Seoul at 8pm on July 25 but instead he held a sit-in protest. On July 31, he voluntarily returned to the police station with thoughts that even though he violated the current law he had made this decision from his conscience.

When the prosecutor's office pleaded for an arrest warrant with detention, charging him with not returning to the police on time and for defamation, a court decided not to issue an arrest warrant without detention based on the fact that there is no worry of him running away or destruction of evidence. After the court decision, he was forced to return to the police station on August 2.

Then at the police station, knowing Mr. Lee objected military service based on his conscious, his commander ordered him to join with his colleagues to disperse people holding assemblies. The commander asked him to follow the order in a serious tone four times but Mr. Lee repeatedly refused the order. Based on this fact the prosecutor once again pleaded for an arrest warrant with detention from a court on August 5, after adding one more charge of his disobeying order.

On August 8, the court issued an arrest warrant with detention saying that Mr. Lee has refused to follow the order from his commander and there is a concern of repetition of the offence. It also added that there is also concern on his running away in the light of his repetition of disobeying an order.

Unofficial translated version

     [Declaration of Conscience] I Resist!

     July 27th 2008 / Lee Gil-jun

     I, a conscripted policeman on active service, declare a conscientious objection to the military, and refuse to rejoin my unit. It was definitely not an easy decision. It was difficult for me to imagine all the pain and suffering it would bring, especially what my parents would have to go through. But here I am, still screaming resistance. It all sounds quite serious. But I'm not doing this to serve a greater cause. I'm just going through a process of finding myself, and trying to have a voice in my own life.

     Yes. Resistance, to me, is a way to lead my life with my own subjectivity. Listening to your inner voice, having the values you believe to be right, adding colors to enrich your life and co-existing with others in harmony are all things that would be meaningful to just about anyone. And in the process, if something should suppress your life, you face it and resist it. That, I believe, is the way to live your life with passion. So now, I shed my old self, the one who has adapted to the ways of suppression, and move on to find myself through resistance.

     This past February, I enrolled in the army as a conscripted policeman. I understand the many criticisms about this decision, especially regarding the actions I'm taking now. Although I oppose the idea of compulsory military service, if I had to serve my own society, I wanted to do something that is truly meaningful to society and myself. After giving it much thought, the path I chose was to join the conscripted police. But it turned out to be far different from what I had expected. Some people might criticize me and say I'm not being responsible for my own decision, but I don't think that takes away my right to object to unjust orders.

     During my service as a riot police officer, I realized that we can be put into unwanted situations by the authorities at any time. Over the last few months, I saw the candlelight protests in the eyes of a policeman, and these thoughts ran through my head. The things people were saying with candles in their hands--"Renegotiate the terms of US beef import!s", "No privatization of state-owned corporations and public health insurance", "No more education system that drives fierce competition in schools." -- all sounded to me like one voice. As if they were saying that the authorities can threaten our lives at any given moment, and they want to stand up to it.

     At the candlelight protests, various voices came together for a common goal. There were many different sights, but the overall atmosphere was not one of grave strife but more like a festival of people. It was a festival for themselves and for the good of society. But the life-threatening authorities showed no efforts to communicate. Instead they forced young men in police uniforms into a situation where they would have to fight against fellow citizens. Should we have quelled the citizens as if they were our enemy because we're such evil people? All of us just wanted to serve our society and our families for 2 years. None of us came into this to attack ordinary people demonstrating in the streets. The authorities would tell us to keep in mind that the protesters are not our enemies, but it was in complete hypocrisy. In reality, they wanted us to treat them as our enemies and always be ready for a violent crackdown at any moment.

     When faced with an unseen force, such as orders given by the system, an individual becomes completely powerless. As I confronted the citizens with my shield, as I committed acts of violence or helped continue the violence, I couldn't dare think to go against the orders. All I could do was to take in all the pain I was faced with. This goes for all the riot policemen out there. We take out our anger on the protesters, our so-called "enemies", and we justify our actions and hide our hurt while those in power that got us here in the first place is nowhere to be seen.

     As days went by, I felt my sense of humanity burning to ashes. As I was brought into repression operations, as I guarded the streets indefinitely, and even when I heard people's complaints and ridicules, it was awful accepting the fact that I had to follow orders without being able to say anything. I could bear the straining working hours and the physical pain, but it got worse when I thought about what I was doing, questioning what exactly it was that I was trying to protect. No one actually speaks of such matters, but is it okay for barely 20 year old young men to act as tools of violent repression if it's for the sake of social "order" and "safety"? Who is to guarantee its legitimacy?

     During this difficult time, I tried to escape from reality in any possible way, but at some point it hit me that running away was no longer the answer. As long as I stayed on that side of the protests, I would always be contributing to suppression, and that would just be an act of abandoning all the things I had seen. It was especially important for me to listen to my inner voice and to express a definite resistance to what was oppressing me in order to live out what's left of my life with my own subjectivity. I was also apprehensive that I would become a shallow hypocrite if I continue to conform to orders that I felt were unjust and neglect all my hurt feelings.

     The only way to heal my wounds, as an offender and a victim, and to get my life back on track, was resistance. Looking back, I feel that I have lived a life of compromise, never resisting the things that suppressed my life. I saw this opportunity as a turning point in my life. This path might be painful and difficult, but it's also somewhat fun discovering the person I want to be.

     I don't consider myself to be a scapegoat or a martyr in this troubled political situation, as many around me have feared. Nor do I want to be the hero of my time. I don't want any part in political games or take advantage of this situation in any way. I'm just staying true to my desires to lead an ordinary life of peace and harmony with others, and I want to be able to live with myself.

     I don't want to declare my struggle to be one of so much seriousness. I believe the process of resistance should be fun. With suppression come many harsh conditions, but confronting them and finding your own voice in the process shouldn't necessarily be taken so seriously. I will continue with my efforts, but I have a small wish that more people will begin to resist any form of suppression that may be in their lives.

     Through my actions, I feel that I am beginning to take control of my life and I hope that the current system of forced, repeated violence can come to an end. Isn't it time to put an end to thousands of young men having to stay up another tormenting night, who could be getting hurt just as I've been?

     Finally, I want to thank all those who have listened to my story, who supported me and are still with me now. I especially want to thank my parents who made a difficult choice in supporting me and withstanding pain for this unworthy son, who understand me and are always on my side. I just want to say that I love you.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:

In South Korea, every man has a duty to fulfil national defense according to the Constitution and they are conscripted to finish the duty for about 26 months. It is estimated that about 3,761 young men from 2002 to 2006 have objected to military service and all are criminalized due to the lack of recognition of conscientious objection to military service and alternative military system. Due to their criminal record, they have had difficulties in getting a job and been discriminated against in society.

The Korean government has been recommended to adopt alternative military service from different UN human rights monitoring mechanisms and the UN Human Rights Committee expressed in its jurisprudence saying that the Republic of Korea has violated articles of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which the Republic of Korea is a state party.

After being criticised, the Ministry of National Defense established a Research Committee on Alternative Service under the Ministry and finished its research in 2006. In addition, the government made its voluntary pledges and commitment to be re-elected as a member of UN Human Rights Council regarding this issue.

However, it is reported on July 4 that the Ministry is reviewing from the beginning the plan of adoption of alternative military service starting early 2009.

SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please write to the authorities listed below urging them to release Mr. Lee so that he is no longer detained before he receives a final decision from the court.

Please be informed that the AHRC has written separate letters to the UN Special Rapporteur on the Question of Torture, freedom of opinion and expression and Working Group on Arbitrary Detention calling for intervention in this matter.

To support this appeal, please click here:

SAMPLE LETTER:

Dear _______,

SOUTH KOREA: Arbitrary detention of a conscientious objector for disobedience

Name of victim: Mr. Lee Gil-gun, 24 years old; currently detain at Joong Rang Police Station and will be transferred to Seong-dong Detention Center
Date of incident: 7 August 2008
Place of incident: Joong Rang Police Station, Seoul

I am writing to express my deep concern regarding the arbitrary detention of a conscripted young man who objected to military service based on his conscience on 7 August 2008.

According to the information that I have received, regretting his duty to suppress protestors after being conscripted, he objected to military service on July 27 and returned to his unit three days after the fixed time. Based on his delay to return to his unit, a prosecutor asked for an arrest warrant with detention from the court but the court dismissed the prosecutor's request.

From the information that I have learned, since the first denial of detention from the court, his commander ordered Mr. Lee to join his colleagues to disperse protestors four times, which Mr. Lee refused. Based on this reason, the prosecutor added one more charge of disobey an order and again asked for his detention from the court. On August 7 his detention order was issued.

Based on the fact that Mr. Lee was conscripted into the battle police and auxiliary police, for him to complete his constitutional duty of national defence, he objected to military service based on his conscience. His commander already aware of his objection repeatedly asked him to follow his order. Due to his disobedience he is detained.

Mr. Lee has to be released from his unit and should be brought before the court where his objection to military service will be judged before the court. However, Mr. Lee was forced to remain in his unit, which caused him to disobey. Finally detained, the court must give its final decision on his case.

Accordingly, I urge you to release Mr. Lee so that his case will be dealt with by the court. I also urge the government of the Republic of Korea to recognise the conscientious objection to military service and adopt the alternative military service: as promised in its voluntary pledges and commitment at the re-election at the UN Human Rights Council, so that those objectors including Mr. Lee will be no longer criminalised on the basis of their conscience.

Yours sincerely,

-----------
PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTERS TO:

1. Mr. Park Jong-su
Senior Superintendent of Police
Jung Lang Police Station
249-2, Jungnang-gu, Seoul
REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Fax: +82 2 971 9306
Tel: +82 2 977 0112
E-mail: jr270@npa.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-180-2008
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.