<Urgent Letter>

We plead for urgent intervention by the GANHRI and the OHCHR in attempts to degrade the National Human Rights Commission of Korea Act by deleting “sexual orientation” from the prohibited grounds of discrimination

From: The National Human Rights Commission of Korea Watch (the NHRCK Watch)

To: Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions (GANHRI) Chairperson Beate Rudolf

United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (UNHCHR) Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein

Date: December 7 , 2017

A group of South Korean human rights activists, we earnestly request statements of your opinions on an urgent issue as we extend our greetings.

Over the past 9 years, the National Human Rights Commission of Korea (NHRCK) was unable to function properly due to the government’s attempts to harm the Commission’s independence (appointment of an unqualified figure as the chair, organizational downsizing, etc.). Moreover, in such a situation, human rights regressed and hate was incited in South Korean society. While hatred against marginalized groups such as LGBTI people, migrants, and surviving families of the victims of the tragic sinking of the MV Sewol (April 2014) spread, the NHRCK failed to present clear positions and solutions, mindful only of the pleasure of the government. Consequently, it lost the trust of civil society.

Since the lawful and peaceful removal of President Park Geun-hye from office (March 2017) and the subsequent regime change (May 2017), the NHRCK likewise has made efforts at self-reform based on self-reflection. However, anti-human rights forces have not stopped actions to reduce the functions of the Commission. In September 2017, the Liberty Korea Party (LKP) proposed a revision bill in order to delete “sexual orientation” from the list of prohibited grounds of discriminations stipulated in the National Human Rights Commission of Korea Act (NHRCKA). More recently, legislator Kim, Kyungjin of the People’s Party, too, has sought to propose a bill that will delete “sexual orientation” from the same law. The People’s Party has not yet adopted this deteriorative bill. Nevertheless, it is a grave situation because the LKP, the political party to which the impeached former President Park belonged, has not been the only party to propose such an anti-human rights and discriminatory bill to revise the NHRCKA. Once it is discussed in the National Assembly (South Korean legislature), this anti-human rights and regressive revision bill will not only become an irreversible tendency in the legislature but also make it impossible to restrict forces who have actively incited hatred against LGBTI people, thus leading to serious human rights violations in all likelihood.

Hatred against LGBTI people continues unabated in South Korea even despite regime change, and the enactment of an umbrella Anti-Discrimination Act likewise has been repeatedly blocked by LGBTI-phobic forces. Certain, socioeconomically and politically influential Christian forces have vehemently opposed any prohibition of discrimination against LGBTI people, arguing, based on narrow-minded interpretations of the Bible, that LGBTI people including homosexuals “go against divine providence.” As a result, open discrimination against LGBTI people has become one of the major agendas of South Korean politics. In order to win support from these Christian forces, conservative politicians have joined such discrimination against LGBTI people. Indeed, discrimination against LGBTI people has become so serious that “Do you support homosexuality?” is one of the main questions asked at confirmation hearings on Presidential nominees for the positions of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Korea and the President of the Constitutional Court of Korea.

In the international arena, the South Korean government has exhibited an attitude affirming the protection of LGBTI people’s human rights through actions such as voting for a 2014 resolution of the UN Human Rights Council urging the eradication of violence based on sexual orientation and gender identity. However, the reality within the country is the exact opposite. Though instated as a result of regime change, even the new administration has failed to express any will to legislate an umbrella Anti-Discrimination Act, mindful only of possible election votes and support from such religious forces. As a result, LGBTI-phobic forces’ voices have become even louder. Accordingly, for the last 10 years, the Universal Periodic Review and various UN human rights agencies including the UN Human Rights Committee, UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination have recommended South Korea to legislate a comprehensive Anti-Discrimination Act that includes the “prohibition of discrimination based on sexual orientation.” However, the government has maintained a de facto refusal, only stating that the issue is undergoing “research.”

With nationwide local elections scheduled to be held in June 2018, the situation is such that politicians who are mindful of votes from large churches may very well support the anti-human rights and regressive revision of the NHRCKA.

As you are well aware, a national human rights institution is an agency intended to create institutions and systems that will advocate and realize human rights in a society. However, if and when this very agency chooses to maintain silence regarding discrimination against particular social minorities, it will not only fail to perform its given role as an NHRI but also serve to lower international human rights levels.

Consequently, the global community needs to state its position strongly so that the NHRCK will not disregard LGBTI people’s rights, mindful only of the pleasure of political power and religious power. If the National Assembly, as the legislature, does not serve to legislate a comprehensive Anti-Discrimination Act and if the revision of the NHRCKA does not serve to advocate human rights, such actions will go against the recommendations of diverse UN human rights agencies. In particular, just as the UN HRC recommended in 2015 out of concern, the reality is that the South Korean legislature has blatantly hosted events discriminating against LGBTI people.

In order to enable the NHRCK to strive for the promotion of the universal human rights of all people including social minorities, we earnestly implore both the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) and the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions (GANHRI) to issue statements urging the National Assembly to stop attempts to encourage discrimination against LGBTI people by deleting “sexual orientation” from the NHRCKA and thereby degrading this law, which is the only nationwide legal protection for gender/sexual minorities at the moment. We entreat you to write letters to the Speaker of the South Korean National Assembly to the effect that “The role of a legislature is to enact laws promoting human rights, and such activities must be based on the recommendations of UN human rights agencies. Consequently, any anti-human rights and regressive measure that will bring about discrimination against minorities including LGBTI people lies outside activities proper to a legislature.”

Once again, we desperately beg you to express your opinions to the South Korean legislature and government in minimal terms so that an NHRI, created through the international human rights community’s endeavors, may not turn into an agency officializing discrimination. We beseech and are deeply grateful for your gracious help. (End)

*Addenda:

- Article 2 Clause 3 of the NHRCKA and the LKP’s revision bill

- The UN HRC’s 2015 recommendations regarding LGBTI people in its Concluding observations on South Korea’s 4th periodic report

Addendum 1: Article 2 Clause 3 of the National Human Rights Commission of Korea Act and the Liberty Korea Party’s Revision Bill

◦ Article 2, current NHRCKA

Article 2 (Definitions)

[Clause] 3. The term “discriminatory act violating the equal right” means any of the following acts, without reasonable grounds, on the grounds of sex, religion, disability, age, social status, region of origin (referring to a place of birth, place of registration, principal area of residence before coming of age, etc.), state of origin, ethnic origin, physical condition such as features, marital status such as single, separated, divorced, widowed, remarried, married de facto, or pregnancy or childbirth, types or forms of family, race, skin color, ideology or political opinion, record of crime whose effect of punishment has been extinguished, sexual orientation, academic career, medical history, etc.: Provided, That the temporary favorable treatment to a particular person (including a group of particular persons; hereafter the same shall apply in this Article) to solve the existing discrimination, the enactment and amendment of statutes and the formulation and enforcement of policy to this effect shall not be deemed a discriminatory act violating the equal right (hereinafter referred to as “discriminatory act”): [emphasis added]

◦ Revision bill representatively proposed be Kim Taeheum, legislator and Liberal Korea Party (LKP) member (regressive contents)

The phrase “sexual orientation, academic career” from the list of prohibited grounds of discrimination in Article 2 Clause 3 is to be revised as “academic career” [emphasis added].

Addendum 2: UN Human Rights Committee - Concluding observations on the fourth periodic report of the Republic of Korea (CCPR/C/KOR/CO/4)

Discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation and gender identity

14.   The Committee is concerned about:

(a)   The widespread discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex persons, including violence and hate speech;

(b)   The punishment of consensual same-sex sexual conduct between men in the military, pursuant to article 92-6 of the Military Criminal Act;

(c)   The authorization of the use of the buildings of the National Assembly and of buildings of the National Human Rights Commission to host so-called “conversion therapies” for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons; [emphasis added]

(d)   The lack of any mention of homosexuality or sexual minorities in the new sex education guidelines;

(e)   The restrictive requirements for legal recognition of gender reassignment (arts. 2, 17 and 26).

Contact: Mr. Hyun Phil Na

        Executive Director of Korean House for International Solidarity (KHIS)

        khis21@hanmail.net