유권자 운동 처벌, 국회의 잘못이다.

2016년 총선넷 활동가 22명에 대한 항소심 유죄 판결 유감 

국회가 유권자 정치표현 금지하는 선거법을 계속 방치하고 있어

오늘(7/18) 서울고등법원 제7형사부는 이승훈 시민사회단체연대회의 사무처장을 비롯한 <2016총선시민네트워크> 활동가를 포함한 시민 22명에게 공직선거법 90조, 91조, 93조, 103조 위반혐의에 대해 유죄 판결을 내렸다. 1심과 달리 벌금액수가 조금씩 낮추어졌고 일부활동가들과 시민들에게 선고유예가 선고되었으나, 벌금 30만원에서 200만원으로 유죄가 선고되었다. 

이들 시민단체 활동가들이 낙선시켜야 할 후보자 사무실 근처 거리에서 그 이유를 밝히기 위해 개최한 기자회견을 집회로 보고, 선거운동기간에는 선거에 영향을 끼치는 집회를 금지한 선거법 103조 3항 위반이라는 것이 검찰과 법원의 판단이었다. 또 기자회견에서 사용한 현수막이나 피켓이 후보자를 알 수 있는 것이라며, 선거일 180일 전부터는 이런 물품 사용을 금지한 선거법 90조 1항과 93조 1항을 위반했고, 또 기자회견에서 확성장치인 마이크를 사용해 발언을 한 것도 선거법 91조 1항 위반이라고 검찰과 법원이 판단하였다. 

이들 선거법 조항들은 선거가 다가올수록 유권자 개개인이나 유권자들이 모인 시민단체들의 활동을 '선거에 영향을 끼칠 수 있다'는 이유로 금지하고 규제하는 악법이다. 후보자들간의 공정한 경쟁을 명분으로 국민들이 후보자나 정당에 대해 비판하고 찬반 의견을 적극적으로 표현하는 것을 금지하는 것은 지나쳐도 너무나 지나친 규제다. 정치에 적극적으로 참여하고자 하는 참정권과 표현의 자유같은 기본권을 침해하는 것이다.

2016총선시민네트워크 결성과 운영에 동참했을 뿐만 아니라, 우리나라의 대표적인 유권자 운동으로 손꼽히고 있는 <2000년 총선시민연대>의 2000년 16대 총선 낙천낙선운동의 연장선에서 결성된 시민사회단체연대회의는, 이 악법 조항들을 기계적으로 적용한 법원, 검찰의 판단에 깊은 유감을 표한다. 그러나 이들 활동가들이 기소되고 재판받게 된 근본적 배경은 잘못된 선거법에 있으며, 그 선거법을 그동안 개정하지 않고 방치해온 국회의원들과 정당들을 비판하지 않을 수 없다. 

시민사회단체연대회의는 10여년 이상 이들 선거법 독소조항을 폐지하거나 대폭 개정할 것을 국회에 청원한 바 있다. 19대 국회에서도 청원서를 제출한 바 있으며, 20대 국회 들어서도 이미 청원서를 국회에 냈다. 몇몇 관심있는 의원들과 함께 개최한 선거법 개정 촉구 토론회도 수 차례 있었다. 그러나 각 정당들과 절대다수의 국회의원들은 시민들의 정치참여가 활성화되면 자신에게 반대하는 시민들의 활동도 활발해질 것을 빌미삼아 이들 조항을 방치해왔다. 

그러는 사이, 유권자운동을 벌인 시민들과 시민단체 활동가들이 기소되고, 재판받고 처벌받는 일이 이어지고 있다. 이 잘못된 선거법으로 처벌받거나 단속당한 이들은 2016년 총선넷 활동가들에 그치지 않는다. 2016년 총선에서도 최경환 후보 공천 반대 1인시위를 벌인 청년단체 활동가,  용산참사 당시 서울경찰청장이었던 김석기 후보의 출마에 반대하는 거리 기자회견을 열었던 용산참사 유가족들도 똑같은 조항들로 처벌받았다. 또 2012년 대선, 2010년 지방선거에서도 동일한 조항으로 처벌받은 경우가 있었다. 이제는 끊어야 한다.

국회의원들과 각 정당에 다시 한 번 촉구한다. 유권자운동을 가로막는 부당한 선거법 규제를 하루빨리 폐지하는데 동참하라. 시민들의 정치적 기본권을 보장하라. 2020년 총선 전에 선거법 규제를 폐지해야 한다.  

성명 [원문보기/다운로드]

South Korea Must Introduce Alternative Service that is Compatible with International Human Rights Standards

Submitted by Amnesty International Korea, Lawyers for a Democratic Society – Minbyun, Military Human Rights Center Korea, People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy and World Without War

We are submitting this communication to inform the UN Special Rapporteurs on the current discussion on introducing alternative service for conscientious objectors in the Republic of Korea (South Korea). After the recent ruling at the Constitutional Court which ask the South Korean government to introduce alternative services until 31 December 2019, the Government formed a working group to draft a bill for alternative service. However, the draft bill proposed by the Government working group does not conform to international human rights standards due to its punitive elements according to media reports and informed sources. This clearly goes against the recommendations given to the Government by several UN human rights mechanisms on introducing alternative service for conscientious objectors. The Government plans to announce the bill for the introduction of alternative service in the next few weeks and it is imperative that this bill is in line with international human rights standards.

1. Background

South Korea operates a system of military conscription under which all male citizens should serve in the military for 21 months. Unfortunately, there is no alternative service for conscientious objectors even though recommendations have been repeatedly made to South Korean government by various UN human rights mechanisms to introduce such service. Every year, hundreds of men have been to prison for exercising their freedom of thought, conscience or religion or belief in the South Korea) (see Table 1. According to Jehovah’s Witnesses, more than 19,300 conscientious objectors have been imprisoned in the country over the last 68 years, an accumulative total of 36,800 years of confinement.

            <Table 1 : Conscientious Objectors in South Korea Since 2009>

                                                       (Unit : persons)

2. Current situation at the Courts

The Constitutional Court ruled on 28 June 2018 that Article 5(1) of the Military Service Act did not conform to the Constitution as it did not include provisions for alternative service for conscientious objectors to military service. This ruling gives the South Korean government until 31 December 2019 to introduce alternative service. This ruling was followed by a Supreme Court ruling on 1 November 2018 in which it ruled in a full bench decision by 9-4 that a Jehovah’s Witness objecting to military service for reasons of conscience could not be punished under Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act. The ruling deems conscientious objection a “justifiable ground” for failing to enlist or comply with a call up within a prescribed period after receiving notification.

At the time of the Supreme Court ruling, approximately 100 individuals remained imprisoned. This ruling also followed a total of 118 acquittals of conscientious objectors at lower courts since 2004 and is expected to have an influence on over 966 cases pending at courts of all levels including over 200 pending at the Supreme Court. It is unclear at the time of writing what steps the government intends to take to address their release and provide remedy for all of those affected such as through pardon, expunging criminal records and/or compensation.

Importantly, in a supplementary opinion submitted to the majority opinion by Justices Park Jung-hwa, Kim Seon- soo and Noh Jeong-hee they write that: “the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights ratified by South Korea has the same force as domestic law according to Article 6, Clause 1, of the Constitution and can serve directly as a norm for adjudication.”

3. Problems of the Government Draft’s Bill

Following the 28 June Constitutional Court ruling, the Ministry of National Defense (MND) formed a working group to draft a bill for alternative service. The working group was composed of staff from the MND, Military Manpower Administration (MMA) (which sits under the MND) and the Ministry of Justice (MoJ). In addition, a consultative committee of civilian experts was formed composed of academics, civil society organization representatives and a representative from the National Human Rights Commission of Korea (NHRCK). The work of this consultative committee was coordinated by a representative from the MoJ and a representative from the MMA.

A total of seven bills for the establishment of alternative service have been submitted by lawmakers to date, including four bills submitted by Democracy and Peace Party, Bareun Mirae Party and Liberty Korea Party lawmakers following the 28 June Constitutional Court ruling which were far more punitive in nature than previous bills in particular in terms of the nature of work (i.e. mine removal) and length (i.e. 2 times the length of military service or longer) 

A public consultation hearing was held jointly by the MND, MoJ and MMA on 4 October in which possible options for alternative service were presented. In particular, it focused on three aspects: 1) length of service, 2) form of service (whether or not those performing alternative service would be housed on site or be able to commute), and 3) field of service Press reports and communication with advisory committee members indicate that the bill when proposed to the National Assembly will have the following elements that fall of short of international human rights standards and law and are likely to be punitive and discriminatory:

1. Length of alternative service set at twice that of military service with on-site shared accommodation; 

2. Service limited to work within correctional facilities; 

3. Evaluation committee for assessment of applications to be established under the Ministry of National

Defense. 

4. Applications for conscientious objection will not be accepted during military service.

4. Suggested Recommendations

• South Korea should introduce forms of alternative service for conscientious objectors that are of a non-combatant or civilian character and not of a punitive nature, and compatible with the reasons for objection as recommended by the UN human rights bodies. 
• Alternative service should be of a comparable length to military service and any additional length must be based on reasonable and objective criteria. The proposal by the Government to set the length at twice that of military service would make this the longest alternative service in the world. At its longest,alternative service should not exceed 1.5 times the length of military service consistent with recommendations from the Human Rights Committee. 
• The decision regarding the recognition of the right of conscientious objection should be taken by an administrative civilian authority entirely separate from the military authorities and its composition should guarantee maximum independence and impartiality. 
• South Korea should introduce various forms of alternative service for conscientious objectors which are compatible with the reasons for conscientious objection as recommended by the Commission on Human Rights. 
• Recognizing that a conscientious objection can arise at any time including before, during and after military service, if there is no complete exemption, the authorities should make alternative service accessible to all those with a genuine objection at any time including during military service.

5. Contact Details

• Tom Rainey-Smith, Campaigns Team, Amnesty International Korea / Email: [email protected] Phone: +82-10-6379-2273
• Yong-Suk Lee, Conscientious Objection Team, World Without War / Email: [email protected] Phone: +82-10-2878-0851

Korean Version >>