Home / News / Urgent Appeals / SOUTH KOREA: Mentally handicapped minor kept for 15 days in police custody despite lack of evidence

SOUTH KOREA: Mentally handicapped minor kept for 15 days in police custody despite lack of evidence

October 18, 2007

URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION – URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal

18 October 2007
------------------------------------------------------
UA-301-2007: SOUTH KOREA: Mentally handicapped minor kept for 15 days in police custody despite lack of evidence

SOUTH KOREA: Arbitrary detention; abuse of power; violence against women; no investigation
------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information from DASAN Human Rights Center, a human rights oranisation in South Korea that a mentally handicapped minor was kept in police custody for about 15 days after her arrest on 30 May 2007. It is alleged that even though the investigating officers failed to prove the evidence, she had been kept long period of detention and her mental health was never taken into consideration during the interrogation. Her condition has now deteriorated and no one is taking responsibility for the long period of detention.

CASE DETAILS:

At around 9:30pm on 30 May 2007, a mentally handicapped  girl (18) (name withheld for her privacy) was arrested by male police officers from Suwon Nambu police station and held for investigation.

Prior to her arrest, the police had been looking for a suspect of an infanticide in Suwon. In the meantime, they questioned a homeless man who had been arrested and charged with theft. During his interrogation, the police obtained information relevant to the infanticide. Based on his statement that a girl was pregnant and delivered a baby, the police went to the Suwon station where some homeless people were staying and arrested her.

Even though she is mentally handicapped minor and unable to speak clearly for herself (which the investigation officers were fully aware of), she was interrogated without the presence of her guardians. The following day, May 31, when her mother and father were present at the interrogation they asked the investigating officers to change the previous statement taken in their absence but this was denied.

According to the information received, the police obtained a DNA sample from her after her arrest and submitted it to the National Institute of Scientific Investigation (NISI) to find out if her DNA would match with that of the deceased infant. Two days later a report was received from the NISI which disclosed inconsistencies of both DNAs, the police proposed her release to the prosecutor in-charge-of, Mr. Yu Cheon Yeol a day after a warrant of detention was issued from a court. However, the prosecutor in control of the investigation ordered a reexamination of the DNA test to check on whether she had delivered a baby at a hospital. Despite of same result for the second test from NISI and no reliable evidence, she had not been released.

The handicapped girl was finally released on July 14 and has been staying in a mental facility where she is being treated. Five organisations have asked for an explanation from the prosecutor for her detention but he has refused to reply saying that he is under no obligation to do so. At the same time the police are trying to exonerate themselves from the responsibility by saying that their investigation was under the control of the prosecutor. While she has been living in fear and her condition has deteriorated after the incident, neither the police nor prosecutor wants to take the responsibility for the long period of detention which was ordered without any concrete evidence.

The AHRC is concerned by the long period of detention of a mentally handicapped person without concrete evidence. Even though it might be possible for those interrogators to say that their practice in keeping her was so called 'legitimate' due to the domestic law, they cannot be exonerated from their responsibility to release as soon as possible when they failed to provide any evidence during the 'legitimate' period of detention. The idea of keeping a suspect locked up until evidence comes available must not be tolerated.

SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please write your letter to the authorities below urging them to investigate long detention period of a mental handicapped minor even after no evidence had been found. Please also urge them to take proper action.

------------------------------------------------------

Suggested letter:

Dear __________,

SOUTH KOREA: Mentally handicapped minor kept for 15 days in police custody despite lack of evidence

Name of victim: A mentally handicapped girl (18) (name and address is withheld for security reason)
Name of alleged perpetrators:
1. Mr. Yu Cheon Yeol, a prosecutor from Suwon District Prosecutor's Office
2. Mr. Yeom Kyu Ho, an investigator from Suwon Nambu police station, Gyeonggi-do
Period of detention: From 30 May to June 14 2007
Detained at: Suwon Nambu police custody (from May 30 to June 7) and Suwon correction bureau (from June 7 to 14), Suwon-si, Gyeonggi-do

I am writing to voice my deep concern regarding the long detention of a mentally handicapped minor in police custody for about 15 days even after no evidence had been found.

According to the information received, on 30 May 2007, a girl was arrested by male police from Suwon Nambu police station and taken to the police station for investigation of killing an infant. Even though she is mentally handicapped minor who has lack of capacity defending her, she was interrogated by the investigation officers without being presence of her guardians during interrogation.

I noted that the National Institute of Scientific Investigation (NISI) had informed the police that her DNA was inconsistent with that of the deceased infant and reexamination of DNA test also revealed no mach. However, they had continued keeping her with having their simple belief without any further reliable evidence. Thus, she was kept in the police custody for about 15 days. When asked the reason of her prolonged detention, the police were trying to exonerate from the responsibility with saying that their investigation was under the control by the prosecutor. The prosecutor in-charge-of responded he had no obligation to reply.

I am appalled that the mentally handicapped minor girl was arrested and detained for 15 days without any concrete evidence and interrogation had been conducted without her guardians. I am disappointed that she had not been released even after NISI had confirmed repeatedly that her DNA was not match with that of the deceased infant. This long deprivation of her liberty despite no evidence was found is infringed with both domestic laws and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which the Republic of Korea is a party.

Therefore, I urge you to conduct investigate into this case without delay. The response such as her detention has not breached the domestic law or such a prolonged detention is legitimated should not acceptable. I firmly believe that any person should be released immediately if there is no concrete evidence after arrest. Legal or disciplinary action has to be taken against those responsible. Compensation should be provided to the victim as well. I further urge you to take every effort to prevent similar violation in the future.

I also draw your attention to the fact that mental health should be considered during the interrogation. The means of investigating agencies including the police and the prosecutor of the Republic of Korea are famous for well-trained law enforcement agency however, this case shows that there is some point that needs to develop more. Even though it might be possible for those interrogators to say that their practice in keeping her was so called 'legitimate' due to the domestic law, it could not be exonerated from their responsibility not to release as soon as possible if they failed to prove evidence even during the 'legitimate' period of detention. The idea of just keeping a suspect locked up until evidence comes available must not be tolerated.

I await your prompt action and response in this matter.


Yours sincerely,


----------------

PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTERS TO:

1. Mr. Lee Kang-Soon
Senior Superintendent
Suwon Nambu Police Station
1199, Maetan 2(i)-dong,
Yeongtong-gu, Suwon-si
Gyunggi province, 443-705
REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Tel: +82 31 211 8008
Fax: +82 31 899 1001

2. Mr. Lee Dong-Gi
Senior Prosecutor
Suwon District Prosecutor's Office
80, Woncheon-dong
Yeongtong-gu, Suwon-si
Gyunggi province, 443-703
REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Tel: +82 31 212 8001
Fax: +82 31 210 4759

3. Chairperson
Prosecutor General
Supreme Prosecutor's Office
1730-1, Seocho3-dong
Seocho-gu, Seoul
REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Tel: +82 2 3480-2000
Fax: +82 3480-2555

4. Mr. Lee Taek-Soon
Commissioner General
P.O Box 120-020
National Police Agency
209 Migeun-dong, Seodaemum-gu, Seoul
REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Tel: +82 2 363 0112
Fax: +82 2 365 5797
E-mail: cnpa100@npa.go.kr

5. Mr. Jung Sung-Jin
Minister of Justice
Ministry of Justice
Building # 1, Gwacheon Government Complex
Jungang-dong 1, Gwacheon-si
Gyunggi province, 427-720
REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Fax: +82 2 503 3532

6. Mr. AHN Kyong-Whan
Chairperson
National Human Rights Commission
Gumsegi Building, No. 16, Ulgiro 1-ga, Jung-gu
Seoul, 100-842
REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Tel: 82 2 2125 9700
Fax: +82 2 2125 9718
E-mail: ahnkw@humanrights.go.kr 

7. Chairperson
UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention
OHCHR-UNOG
1211 Geneva 10
SWITZERLAND
Fax: +41 22 917 9006 (ATTN: WORKING GROUP ARBITRARY DETENTION)

8. Ms. Yakin Erturk
Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women
Room 3-042
OHCHR-UNOG
1211 Geneva 10
SWITZERLAND
Tel: +41 22 917 9615
Fax: +41 22 917 9006 (ATTN: SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN)

Thank you.

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

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
UA-301-2007
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.