October 13- The NHRCK issued a recommendation on August 31, 2009 to the head of the [A] Regional Immigration Office to take a caution measure and provide training to immigration officers in relation to an incident in which an immigration enforcement officer during the course of an enforcement action exposed his abdomen while inappropriately providing identification.
Ms. Park (Female, aged 33), a Chinese national of Korean descent, filed a petition with the NHRCK at the end of June 2009 stating, “On June 28, 2009, around 16:00, at a bus stop in Ansan city, Gyeonggi, the respondent carried out an enforcement action inappropriately when he suddenly raised half of his T-shirt, showing bare skin, while blocking the way forward.”
In the course of the NHRCK’s investigation, the respondent explained that he was not wearing an undershirt while performing his immigration enforcement duties and because the T-shirt he was wearing did not have a pocket he wore his identification card under the shirt. When he came upon the petitioner, he rolled up his shirt in his rush to identify himself and in fact his skin was exposed, but he did not intend to cause the petitioner sexual humiliation or shame.
However, taking the following points in combination, the NHRCK determined that the respondent’s actions violated a number of provisions in relevant statutes and infringed upon the rights of the petitioner. First, during the performance of public duties by a public servant taking ordinary enforcement actions, the showing of the abdomen, as something unexpected by citizens, could not have been a preservation of dignity. Second, even though the respondent was required to make clear the purpose of the enforcement action and present identification in a respectful manner, and with respectful speech and behavior, in proportion to the enforcement activity and questioning, the way he wore and presented the identification card was inappropriate. Third, regarding the suddenness of the act in question, even though the respondent verbally made his status and affiliation clear, it was not in an objective circumstance warranting the petitioner’s trust and confidence. Fourth, viewing the behavior from the perspective of an ordinary adult woman experiencing it, there was a strong possibility that it would cause feelings of sexual humiliation and uneasiness.
Taking these points together, the NHRCK determined that the respondent’s action violated Article 3 of the Act on the Performance of Duties by Police Officers on police questioning performed by a special judicial officer, the required observance of lawful procedure while performing enforcement work in accordance with Article 27 of the Immigration Control Act on requests for presentation of alien residence cards, and Article 63 of the State Public Officials Act on the duty to maintain dignity. The Commission also determined that the respondent’s actions infringed upon the fundamental rights of the petitioner, including personal rights and the right to equality, guaranteed under Articles 10 and 11 of the Constitution as protected by Article 2 (Sexual Harassment) of the NHRCK Act which prohibits the inducement of sexual humiliation and shame.
Therefore, under Article 44 paragraph 1(1) and Article 42 paragraph 4(3) of the NHRCK Act, the NHRCK issued a recommendation to the head of the agency to which the respondent belongs to take a cautionary measure in regard to the respondent himself, to call on the agency’s officers to follow proper procedure when performing enforcement work related to immigration, and to hold human rights training in order to bring attention to maintenance of dignity, including clothing style, in order to prevent the occurrence of acts of human rights infringement that cause, among other things, contempt for personal worth and dignity and sexual humiliation.
