Briefing Paper on Conscientious Objection and Human Rights issues in the Republic of Korea

• Executive Summary


• 1. The Military Service System of the Republic of Korea
  
  • 1.1 Outline of Military Service Regulations
  
  
  • 1.2 Social Aspects of Military Service


• 2. Conscientious Objection to Military Service
  
  • 2.1 Present Situation
    
    • Table1. Imprisoned Conscientious Objectors by Year
    
    
    • Table2. Current Status of Buddhist or Non-religious Conscientious Objectors
  
  
  • 2.2 Punishment
    
    • Cases of Conscientious Objectors to the military service of the Reserve Forces
  
  
  • 2.3 Attempts to influence legislation
  
  
  • 2.4 A Social Movement for Conscientious Objection
• Attachments:
  
  • 1. Current Status of Conscientious Objectors in Prison (as of February 15, 2004)
  
  
  • 2. Position of the Ministry of Defense Concerning Alternative Service
  
  
  • 3. Statement of the Christian Council of Korea

MIMBYUN-Lawyers for a Democratic Society
Korea Solidarity for Conscientious Objection (KSCO)
War Resisters' International (WRI):

Report to the United Nations Commission on Human Rights
60^th Session(15 March-23 April 2004)
Item 11(g) Conscientious objection to Military Service

Executive Summary

Republic of Korea implements a mandatory military service system, not recognizing the right to conscientious objection to military service and not having in place any form of systematic provision for conscientious objectors. As of February, 2004, there are 521 conscientious objectors incarcerated in prisons, and each year, approximately 700 conscientious objectors are being punished. The majority of conscientious objectors in the Republic of Korea are members of Jehovah's Witnesses, with a few members of churches such as the Seventh Day Adventist also in existence. Without exception, conscientious objectors are subject to 18 months to 2 years imprisonment. Stricter standards are applied to conscientious objectors when considering parole compared to other prisoners, and even after they have served their term, they are disadvantaged for life, as they lose their right to enter public services and their choice of employment becomes restricted due to their criminal record. 

With the North and South Koreas having been at a military standoff, anti-communism and national security has been the central ideal governing over South Korean society. During the 30 years of military dictatorship, the right to freedom of thought and conscience could always be restricted under the name of national security, and any who dared to object or resist would be subject to harsh punishments, even to the point of losing their lives. Objecting to military service, especially, was unimaginable. Since military dictatorship ended in the 1990's, South Korean society has been going through a process of democratization in many areas, and concerns for human rights have improved greatly; however, national security continues to be an issue of primary importance and as a result, mandatory military service still takes precedence over human rights or individual human security concerns.

During the past 50 years, approximately 10,000 members of Jehovah's Witnesses have objected to military service, which, as a group, makes up the highest number of imprisoned conscientious objectors to military service in the world. However, the government has yet taken any action on their behalf. The government of Republic of Korea has the responsibility as a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), and it should respect the provisions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and report the state of human rights in the Republic of Korea to the relevant UN bodies regularly; however, it has, to this point, failed to ever report its shortcomings in the area of conscientious objection to military service to the UN. The Ministry of Defense, citing concerns such as special security concerns in the Korean peninsula and maintaining equal treatment in military service, continues to oppose implementing a system of alternative services. Also opposing a system of alternative services are conservative Christian groups in the Republic of Korea, which consider Jehovah's Witnesses to be a heretic sect.

Even so, conscientious objectors to military service continue to declare their objection each year. Recently, with the declaration of objection to military service by non-religious conscientious objectors with anti-war, pacifist beliefs, the issue of conscientious objection to military service is moving beyond human rights concerns, developing into a non-violent movement for peace.

In conclusion, the main concerns of MINBYUN-Lawyers for a Democratic Society and War Resisters' International are:

1. Lack of any provision recognizing the right to conscientious objection, in breach of Article 18 of the ICCPR;

2. Imprisonment of conscientious objectors as a result of this, and especially repeated imprisonment, which is in breach of the principle non bis in idem, as outlined by the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention in its Recommendation No 2;

3. Social discrimination of conscientious objectors after their punishment, especially restriction on work in public administration and a criminal record.

1. The Military Service System of the Republic of Korea

1.1 Outline of Military Service Regulations

Military Service in the Republic of Korea operates under a universal conscription system, according to the Military Service Act. Those who are eligible for conscription are assigned to one of two categories of service: active military service or supplementary military service. The period of the active military service is 24 to 28 months[1] and includes 5 weeks of basic military training. Those who complete active military service duties are subsequently assigned to the reserve forces and must perform approximately 160 hours of military training for a period of 8 years. The period of service for supplementary military service is 28 to 32 months and includes 4 weeks of basic military training, as required by the Military Service Act of the Republic of Korea. Supplementary military service, a form of alternative labor service, is granted based on factors such as physical or mental deficiencies, level or quality of academic achievements, special family circumstances, or being skilled in a special or unusual profession, as specified under the Military Service Act. According to Articles 26-33 Military Service Act supplementary military service will mainly be performed as public service personnel at national or local government agencies, public organizations, or in social welfare facilities, for the purpose of public interests. Those who complete supplementary military service are then also transferred to the reserve forces. However, the Military Service Act does not have any regulation for genuine civilian alternative services for conscientious objectors.

Among the total male population of 48,000,000 in Korea, approximately 690,000 are assigned to active military service duties while approximately 140,000 are assigned to supplementary military service duties, of which 60,000 in public administration and 80,000 in "designated enterprises".[2] According to statistics from the Office of Military Manpower Administration, during the first half of 2001, 4,916 men, or 2.6% of those who received physical examinations for military service, were exempted from active military service due to physical or mental deficiencies or because they were engaged in special professions or had special qualifications. Those who were qualified as such specialists could fulfill their supplementary military service duties by working as a researcher or technician at a company. All others who are eligible for supplementary service are limited to those with physical or mental deficiencies or special family circumstances, which are subject to the judgment and decision of the Office of Military Manpower Administration, under the current Military Service Act. Therefore, those who are determined as eligible for active military service are not given any opportunity for alternative labor service in the supplementary military service. Furthermore, supplementary military service also includes 4 weeks of basic military training. Since conscientious objectors refuse to receive such military training, they are rejected even when they are trained in special or unusual professions, as applied to alternative labor services. The Military Service Act only has stipulations for punishment on the non-performance of military service duties[3]^. It has to be highlighted that the Military Service Act dos not include any provision for conscientious objection. The UN Special Rapporteur on Religious Freedom pointed out in his report of 2001 that this is not in compliance with Article 18 of the ICCPR, especially general comment No. 22.[4]

1.2 Social Aspects of Military Service

In the society of South Korea, matters relating to the military and national security have a very complicated history and ideological background. The military and national security in the Republic of Korea, the only divided country in the world, have been deemed an absolute necessity directly related to survival, and political regimes have furthered this concept, taking advantage of this situation to maintain their power. The military thus became a sacred ground of sorts during the 30-year-period of military dictatorship, far off from the monitoring of civilian groups. As a result, serious infringements of human rights have occurred inside the military, where injustice and corruption ran rampant. Although the society has improved and democracy has been furthered in many areas of society, within the military changes have only been implemented very slowly. It is a well-known secret that people of privileged classes have their sons exempted from military service by manipulating their power or wealth. The military is understood among the people to be a place where those who lack financial or political power are forced to go, to the extent that the system of military service has been described as "the poor man's draft." This has led to a great deal of social indignation and sense of deprivation. In fact, the extent of effect this issue has in society was demonstrated during the past presidential election, when the suspected draft evasion of a candidate's son was a major factor in his defeat in the election. 

This issue of inequality in the draft system has made conscientious objection to military service seem to be another manipulative tool for a privileged classes, rather than a possible solution for the problems within the military system. Furthermore, the personal experiences of those subject to this thus far, have never managed to challenge the system of mandatory military service for the past 50 years, and have given rise to the sense among the general public that a certain level of human rights violations is inevitable within the military.

The long-standing division of the nation, the conscription system, and the militarization of the whole society by military dictatorship regimes, underlie such social recognition of military service. And after the Roh Mu-Hyun administration took office, as the withdrawal or redeployment of the U.S. forces in the Republic of Korea has become an issue, the position that the national defense budget should be increased and Korean military forces be strengthened in order to keep and protect the Korean peninsula with the military power of South Korean forces alone, is gaining momentum.

2. Conscientious Objection to Military Service

The Republic of Korea is a party to the ICCPR. Although the right to conscientious objection is derived from Article 18 ICCPR, the Republic of Korea does not recognize this right. During the 50 years since the conscription system was adopted, the punishment of conscientious objectors has never been challenged at all ostensibly due to reasons such as Korea's unique security situation. Conscientious objectors have suffered legal sanctions and severe social discrimination on account of their objection. Despite this situation, the number of conscientious objectors has continually increased year after year, and conscientious objection has now become a major social issue.

2.1 Present Situation

As of February, 2004, there were 521 conscientious objectors in prisons in the Republic of Korea.[5] The number of conscientious objectors who have been punished since the first case was reported during the Japanese occupation in 1939 has increased to about 10,000. The recent trend shows an average of 700 conscientious objectors to military service each year choosing prison over taking up arms: 683 in 2000, 804 in 2001, 734 in 2002, and 498 in 2003.

    Table1. Imprisoned Conscientious Objectors by Year

Most of the conscientious objectors in the Republic of Korea are Jehovah's Witnesses, with a handful being Seventh Day Adventists and others. 

The division of the nation, North and South, has furthered the custom of holding military service as a sacred practice in the Republic of Korea and made it difficult for outsiders to present any opposition to the military's internal affairs, so the state of human rights related to the military has been outside the concern of the general public, and cases of conscientious objection have been hardly discussed. Under such circumstances, Jehovah's Witnesses, who make up the vast majority of the conscientious objectors in the Republic of Korea, have suffered dual social discriminations not only being given legal punishment for their objection and but also being branded as abnormal citizens and religious fanatics

In addition to the legal punishment for their conscientious objection, those who refuse military service must live with the social stigma of being a military service evader and a criminal record throughout their lives, which prevents them from working in government agencies and they are often rejected by private companies when their criminal records are checked. The Military Service Act places restrictions on employment for government jobs or for public organizations on those who have not completed their military service except for the reasons permitted under the law.[6] Also, the legal punishments placed on objectors were often arbitrary.

However, the general public was oblivious even to the existence of such individuals in their society.

Of special concern are cases of repeated punishment:

Ko, Jae-sun worked as an special industrial technician at Daekwang Diecasting Co.,Ltd. in Osan, Kyunggi-do from October 2002 to May 2002. He objected to the writ for three weeks' basic military training on May 6, 2002 and conscripted to active military service on October 31, 2002, but objected to it and the judge gave him a suspended sentence for the reason that the objector might change his religious beliefs. He was eligible for re-conscription because his sentence was less than 1 year and 6 months. Requested the prosecutor to appeal to the higher court to prevent him from becoming imprisoned twice, but rejected. Conscripted to active military service on November, 2003. Re-objected to it and detained. The judge used his authority to release Mr. Ko on bail, but the case is still pending.

The United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention has repeatedly dealt with the issue of repeated imprisonment of conscientious objectors. Most recently in Opinion 24/2003 the Working Group said that "very much along the line of its reasoning in its Opinion No 36/1999, also bearing in mind its Recommendation No 2 on Detention of conscientious objectors (E/CN4/2001/14 paragraphs 91 to 94) the Working Group is of the opinion that if after an initial conviction the persons condemned exhibit, for reasons of conscience, a constant resolve not to obey the subsequent summons, penalties for disobedience have the same content and purpose - compel an individual to serve in the army. Therefore the second and subsequent penalties are not compatible with the principle of non bis in idem, as borne out of article 14, paragraph 7, of the ICCPR ... Moreover, repeated penalties for the disobedience to serve in the military would be tantamount to compelling someone to change his mind for fear of being deprived of his liberty if not for life, at least until the date at which citizens cease to be liable to military service"[7]

The issue of conscientious objection in the Republic of Korea started being publicized in 2001, when a weekly magazine reported that numerous conscientious objectors had been punished and there were still hundreds of them in prisons. At the end of 2001, Tae-Yang Oh, a 26-year-old Buddhist and pacifist, declared he is also a conscientious objector providing an example to discredit the bias that conscientious objection is a fanatic act of a particular religion. Furthermore, in February 2002, "The Korea Solidarity for Conscientious Objection (KSCO)" consisting of about 30 civic groups was formed, and it began to conduct a campaign for the protection of the right to conscientious objection. After the announcement of conscientious objection to military service by Tae-yang Oh, another Buddhist and other conscientious objectors who objected based on non-religious, personal or political reasons began to appear publicly, totaling 11 persons until now (See Table 2).

In November 2003, Cheol-min Kang, a 22-year-old soldier, who in opposition to the Korean government's decision to dispatch troops to Iraq refused to return from his vacation to military service, was indicted on the charge of desertion from military service. The fact that soldiers, who should be protecting the territory and people of their home country, were being asked to participate in what he perceived to be a war of invasion made him question seriously the role of the military and his position within it. He held that the decision to dispatch soldiers to Iraq clearly violates the Constitutional provision against wars of invasions and stated that he will continue to refuse serving in the military until the decision to dispatch soldiers to Iraq is reversed. Cheol-min Kang's objection to military service, which raised a societal question about the very purpose of the military, was the first instance of an objection to military service by a soldier on active duty. In light of the stipulations in 1998 resolution[8] of the UN Commission on Human Rights which provide that soldiers on active military duty can object to military service, it is evident that the military authorities' punishment of Cheol-Min Kang is doubtless a violation of the duty of an International Human Rights Convention member state.

Table2. Current Status of Buddhist or Non-religious Conscientious Objectors

As conscientious objection to military service became an important social issue in Korean society, university students who have not yet been conscripted formed a so-called 'Preliminary Objection Movement' in September 2002, declaring their objection to military service in advance[9].

2.2 Punishment

Under the Korean Military Service Act, there is no provision for the right to conscientious objection, and thus there are no provisions for a genuine civilian alternative service for conscientious objectors. Therefore, conscientious objectors in the Republic of Korea are, without exception, punished with imprisonment of three years or less on the charge of mutiny under the provisions of Article 44 of the Military Penal Code or on the charge of military service evasion under the provisions of Article 88 of the Military Service Act. After discharge from active military service, anyone who objects to an assignment to reserve forces is punished with a fine of 2 million won or less or imprisonment of 6 months under the provisions of Article 90 of the Military Service Act.

Prior to mid-2001, almost all objectors to military service were forced to enlist and report to the barracks; therefore, all objectors were automatically sentenced, on the charge of mutiny, to 2 or 3 years imprisonment, the maximum sentence available under the law[10]. However, since the customary practice of forced enlistment by the Military Manpower Administration was abolished in 2001, most conscientious objectors today refuse to enlist, and are punished under the Military Service Act. They are now being sentenced to one and a half years to two years imprisonment by civilian courts. Under the Military Service Act, those who are sentenced to imprisonment of one and a half years or more are exempted from military service in Korea[11]. Therefore, those who serve prison sentences are no longer conscripted for military service.  Currently most civilian courts sentence conscientious objectors for a period of one and a half years, which releases them from military service under the law.

Conscientious objectors to military service in reserve forces, on the other hand, are repeatedly called for military training in reserve forces even after being subject to punishment once for their objection to military training. The fact that objectors are subject to repeated punishments for the same offense is a serious matter and the total amount of fines from such punishments are of an amount that can threaten livelihoods. Recently, a conscientious objector to military training in reserve forces was sentenced, on separate occasions, to imprisonments of 10 months and 8 months. Although this conscientious objector served in prison for over one and a half years, since each of the prison terms, on its own, did not reach the one and a half year threshold, the vicious circle of summoning him for military training and punishing him for his objection continues.

Cases of Conscientious Objectors to the military service of the Reserve Forces:

Hong-gi Choi became one of Jehovah's Witnesses after being discharged from active military service in 1999 and began to object to the military training of the reserve forces. Through summary proceedings, he was sentenced to pay a fine of 3,350,000 won; five other cases are pending, and in one case, he received a suspended sentence of one year of imprisonment. Such heavy fines and frequent trials have made it difficult for him to live a normal life, and if he is again sentenced to be guilty, he will have to serve the new prison term and the previous suspended prison term together.

With regard to punishment, the human rights violations against conscientious objectors in the Republic Korea can be classified as follows:

First, the Constitution of the Republic of Korea stipulates that a defendant is presumed to be not guilty until ruled guilty, and it is an accepted general principle of the Criminal Procedure Code that when there is no fear that the accused may destroy the evidence of crime, the accused shall be put on trial without being physically detained. However, conscientious objectors have generally been detained from the commencement of investigation. Since the activities of civilian groups to improve the state of human rights have begun in earnest in 2002, the number of cases where objectors were investigated without being incarcerated has risen; however, currently, most conscientious objectors are being detained and investigated.  Furthermore, they are not candidates for government provisions toward inmates such as an amnesty, which is granted several times a year.

With regard to their in-prison treatment,  Jehovah's Witness conscientious objectors in prison were not permitted to hold religious meetings in prisons until mid-2003 on the reasons such as "They violate positive laws and evade military service, and thus, are serving their prison terms because of peculiar religious doctrines; therefore, permitting them to have religious meeting which can strengthen their beliefs is against the purpose of correction and education"[12] Such discriminatory treatment was finally resolved in mid 2003, as the Ministry of Justice accepted the recommendation of the National Human Rights Commission, and permitted Jehovah's Witness conscientious objectors and other prisoners of minor religions to hold religious meetings in prison.[13]

The practice of repeated imprisonment, independent of the questions whether someone refuses to enlist or refuses to perform reserve duties, is in breach of the international principle non bis in idem, as expressed by the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention in its Recommendation No.2 on Detention of conscientious objectors (E/CN4/2001/14 paragraphs 91 to 94), and UN Commission on Human Rights resolution 2002/45.

2.3 Attempts to influence legislation

 Until the amendment to the Constitution of the Republic of Korea in 1987 provided for a Constitutional Court, the Supreme Court was the highest court in the country, which had the authority to review laws to determine their Constitutionality. Conscientious objectors appealed to the Supreme Court in 1969, 1985, and 1992 claiming that conscientious objection should not be considered a violation of the Military Service Act because conscientious objection arises from the freedom of religion and conscience guaranteed by the Constitution. However, the Supreme Court has repeatedly refused to accept their claims, holding that "the so-called conscientious decision such as the objection to the military service on account of religious doctrines does not fall within the freedom of religion and conscience guaranteed under the Constitution"[14]. Following these precedents, courts in the Republic of Korea have, without exception, have handed out guilty verdicts to conscientious objectors.

However, on January 29, 2002 Gyeong-su Lee, on trial at the Nambu Branch of Suwon District Court as a conscientious objector to military service, appealed to the Constitutional Court to review the Constitutionality of Article 88 of the current Military Service Act, which provides for punishments without providing a genuine civilian alternative service for conscientious objectors and thus infringes upon their freedom of religion and conscience as guaranteed by the Constitution. The Constitutional Court has granted certiorari and the case is under review. Since then, courts have generally decided to postpone their decisions on conscientious objection until the Constitutional Court makes its ruling, and accordingly, many conscientious objectors are free on bail, awaiting the decision of the Constitutional Court. Since more courts have postponed their decisions or sentenced objectors to the minimum period of imprisonment needed to grant them exemption from re-conscription, the number of conscientious objectors in prison decreased from 1,640 at the end of 2000 to 521 in February 2004.[15]

In early 2001, there were attempts by National Assemblymen to promote a Bill to Introduce an Alternative Service for Conscientious Objectors, but since that attempt was foiled due to strong opposition from conservative Christian churches, there has been no further progress from the legislature since. Korea Solidarity for Conscientious Objection (KSCO) has attempted to draft a proposed legislation providing for conscientious objection and thus for a genuine civilian alternative service and conducted a signature campaign in April 2002 where lawyers, law professors, human right activists, etc. participated. However, the government and the National Assembly, to this point, have yet to respond.

2.4 A Social Movement for Conscientious Objection

In 2001, as the long-standing stance of conscientious objection by Jehovah's Witness became known to the general public, and Tae-yang Oh, a Buddhist and pacifist, declared his conscientious objection, the level of interest in conscientious objection within society has rapidly increased. The fact that approximately 10,000 Jehovah's Witnesses have objected to military service for reasons of conscience over the past 50 years and that Korea has the largest number of imprisoned objectors in the world served as a wakeup call to the value of human rights which had been pushed aside for reasons of national security. Various areas of society such as the press, academia, legal and religious circles have had various debates or discussions over the issue of conscientious objection and adoption of the right to conscientious objection, and an alternative service, and in February 2002, the "Statement by 1,000 Persons Urging the Recognition of Conscientious Objection and the Adoption of an Alternative Service System," signed by 1,552 people, including distinguished persons from the media, academia, legal and religious circles, and civic groups, was published. Korea Solidarity for Conscientious Objection (KSCO), in which 36 civic and social groups are participating, has been conducting various debates and forums, providing counseling and legal services for conscientious objectors, and promoting the legislation of conscientious objection and an alternative service system since it was founded in early 2002. By doing so, KSCO is making efforts to expand the concerns of the society for conscientious objection. In April 2002, a delegation of KSCO and MINBYUN-Lawyers for a Democratic Society attended the 58^th session of the UN Commission for Human Rights and reported on the issue of conscientious objection in the Republic of Korea, and in March 2003, a member of the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and a delegation from the Taiwan Military Manpower Administration attended an International Conference for Conscientious Objection held in Seoul with the cooperation of the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC) and War Resisters' International (WRI).

Under such circumstances, even public opinions which opposed the recognition of the right to conscientious objection and the adoption of an alternative service system on the grounds that it favors a certain religion, threatens national security, and promotes inequality in military service are recognizing that a realistic amendment to the system needs to be made for conscientious objectors. The appeal to the Constitutional Court to review the constitutionality of the Military Service Act, the increasing decisions by lower courts to release on bail and postpone their decisions on objectors, and the court sentences of one and a half year imprisonment on conscientious objectors are a reflection of the social shift in recognizing and becoming more sensitive to the issue of conscientious objection.

However, the government and legislature have yet to show any effort to recognize conscientious objection and to adopt a system of alternative service even as conscientious objection to military service has increased in importance as a social issue. In fact, the government and the Ministry of National Defense have been working to oppose conscientious objection to military service. On October 2002, then-president Kim Dae-jung revealed his position in stating that "Under our circumstances, evasion of military service cannot be allowed for any reason whatsoever and allowing for such measures would not be equitable," and thereafter, furthered the practice of conducting investigations on objectors while detaining them. On March of 2003, the Ministry of Education was criticized for sending an official document to universities asking them to stop the spread of objection to military service. The Ministry of Defense also refuses to budge from their stance of opposition since it announced its "Position of the Ministry of Defense on Alternative Service for Objectors to Military Service"[16] in October of 2001. They also held a training program for current soldiers, telling them conscientious objection to military service must not be permitted under any circumstances.

Also within the legislature, the issue of objection to military service is treated negatively. When in June 2003, the National Human Rights Commission as a part of an movement to encourage the formation of private organizations, supported the production of a documentary about objection to military service, the Legislation and Judiciary Committee criticized them, stating, "The National Human Rights Commission supported the production of a documentary on conscientious objection to military service; are they trying to lend support to the movement of young people to evade military service?"

Under such circumstances, the National Human Rights Commission has not yet presented a clear position on the issue of objection to military service, despite the submission of several petitions on the issue. Reflecting on the resolution 2002/45 of the UN Commission on Human Rights which urged the National Human Rights Commission of each country to review its law and practices concerning conscientious objection[17], the National Human Rights Commission of the Republic of Korea is required to make more positive effort to do so. Conservative Christian associations such as the Christian Council of Korea which treats Jehovah's Witnesses as heretics have not shown any change in their position[18] of opposing conscientious objection and alternative service systems for conscientious objectors.

On the other hand, conscientious objection is expanding as an important method of practicing the recently intensified anti-war sentiment and pacifism. The incidence in June 2002, when two female middle school students were killed after being run over by a tank of American forces stationed in Korea and the increasing military tension between North Korea and America around the North Korean nuclear issue have made many Korean people doubt the viability of the traditional national security policy which relies on military might and increase support for anti-war and peace movements. The decision to dispatch Korean soldiers to Iraq that the National Assembly made and passed through over two sessions in April 2003 and in February 2004 provided occasions for the anti-war and pacifist movement to expand greatly. Tens of thousands people came out into the streets and raised a united front against war and dispatching troops, and many people headed to Iraq vowing to act as human shields. However, the government and National Assembly justified American invasion into Iraq and their decision to dispatch soldiers to Iraq on the logic that dispatching troops is unavoidable and is beneficial for the nation under the current circumstances where Korea must rely upon America militarily and economically. In addition, they took measures to pour cold water over the movements for human rights and peace through the making or passing measures such as the Prevention of Terrorism Act[19] and the revision of the Assembly and Demonstration Act[20] arousing great opposition from civic groups.

Under these circumstances, conscientious objection is receiving much attention from youths who are at the age of conscription as a way to voice anti-war and pacifist sentiments. Since Tae-yang Oh became the first non-Jehovah's Witness to declare conscientious objection towards the end of 2001, a total of 10 persons who are not Jehovah's Witnesses declared their objection to military service based on their beliefs in pacifism and have been already punished or are on trial at the court. The issue of conscientious objection, which began to be brought to the fore as Jehovah's Witness conscientious objectors came to be known to the public in 2001, is now an issue of protecting human rights, and at the same time, is now being recognized as a peace movement with such human rights at its foundation.

Notes

[1] Under the revised Military Service Act passed by the National Assembly in August 2003, the periods of active military service and supplementary military service were each shortened by two months. Accordingly, since October 2003, the period of active military service has been 24 months in the Army, 26 months in the Navy, and 28 months in the Air Force. Unlike the Army, the Navy and the Air Force are under a voluntary military service system. The reduction in the period of military service was in fulfillment of a promise given by the ruling and opposition political parties during the past presidential campaign.
[2] 2000?White Paper of National Defense?
[3] The provisions of Article 88 of the Military Service Act stipulates the imprisonment of three years or less for objection to active military service, and provisions of Article 90 of the Military Service Act stipulates the imprisonment of 6 months or less or a fine of up to 2 million won for objection to military training of the reserve forces.
[4] Report submitted by Mr. Abdelfattah Amor, Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief, in accordance with Commission on Human Rights resolution 2002/40 (paragraphs 65-68), 15 January 2003
[5] See Attachment 1
[6] Article 76 of the Military Service Act
[7] United Nations Commission on Human Rights, Working Group on Arbitrary Detention: Opinion No 24/2003 (ISRAEL), 28 November 2003
[8] UN Commission for Human Rights, Resolution 1998/77
[9] Press interviews of Dong-hyeok Na, a conscientious objector, and students who declared their stance as preliminary conscientious objectors (9.12. 2002)
[10] The court maximum sentence under the Military Criminal Code was increased from two years to three by the revised law No. 4703(revised on 1.15,1994).
[11] Paragraph 2 of Article 136 of the Enforcement Decree of the Military Service Act
[12] Reply from the Ministry of Justice to the suggestion for adjusting its discriminatory procedures in prisons(Gyo Hwa 61490-24)
[13] News report of the National Human Rights Commission dated July 18, 2003, "Permission of Meetings of Minor Religions in Confinement Facilities by the Ministry of Justice"
[14] Godo Decision 1534 of the Supreme Court[Mutiny] (9.14,1992)
[15] According to the information provided by Jehovah's Witnesses, as of February 2004, 66 conscientious objectors have been arraigned without physical confinement and 89 others are on trial, released on bail, in addition to these imprisoned conscientious objectors.
[17] UN Commission on Human Rights, Resolution 2002/45
[18] [19] The Anti-terror Act whose deliberation was suspended at the National Assembly because of the strong opposition of civic groups in 2002 was reattempted in the middle of 2003 but was aborted again this year due to civic groups' opposition. However, the government has not yet withdrawn the bill. Some provisions of this law contain factors to infringe upon human rights. For example, it stipulates the concepts of 'terror and 'terrorist organization' very vaguely and also gives an authority for the Counter Terrorism Center under the National Intelligence Service to monitor and control even the legal political activity by reason of preventing terror. Many human rights organizations point out that the anti-terror law is almost not related to terror but only a bill designed to strengthen again the power of the National Intelligence Service which has been down-sized gradually from the end of the military dictatorship governments from the beginning of 1990.
[20] The Law Concerning Assembly and Demonstration passed through the National Assembly in December 2003 began to effective in March 2004. According to this law, the freedom of assembly and demonstration is in fact terminated because any assembly or demonstration is prohibited by the reason of so-called 'violent demonstration' even though it may be a trivial defensive violent incident occurring during the assembly or a peaceful procession on a major street where order-conductors are stationed is prohibited or an assembly is prohibited near an elementary school or middle school or high school or military facilities or any assembly which generates noise over a certain level designated by a presidential decree is prohibited. Furthermore, assemblies shall be reported one month in advance, making it difficult for a large assembly to be held because the place and time should be chosen in advance, but only small assemblies on holidays which are not against foreign official residence or office are permitted. Civic groups are opposing the revised assembly and demonstration law is in fact 'a law prohibiting assembly and demonstration' which infringes greatly upon democracy and the freedom of expression and planning a civic movement of disobedience.

Current Status of Conscientious Objectors in Prison (as of February 15, 2004)