HOME > Main Activities > Press Releases
Excessive use of physical force when arresting a person in the act violates the right to liberty of the person
- Recommendation to the police chief to provide job training for investigators -
□ The National Human Rights Commission of Korea (hereinafter referred to as the “NHRCK”) determined that the arrest of a person red-handed involving an excessive use of physical force constituted violation of the person’s right to liberty described in the Article 12 of the Constitution, and recommended that the police chief in charge provide job training to investigators to ensure non-recurrence
□ The victim, who was the chairman of the ◇◇ Federation of Trade Unions, had filed an application to hold an outdoor rally at the main gate of a steel mill to denounce the steel mill's unilateral labor-management practices and to demand transparent wage negotiations. During the protest, police officers from the OO Police Station (hereinafter referred to as the “respondents”) installed safety mats and other equipment around a roadside watchtower to ensure the safety of union executives protesting on the tower. The victim, who objected to this action, was arrested on the spot. The victim filed a complaint with the NHRCK, alleging that the respondents used excessive physical force during the arrest, including restraining the victim’s body, pressing his head against the asphalt road, and handcuffing him behind his back.
□ The respondents stated that the watchtower obstructed traffic flow. Despite efforts to persuade the workers on the watchtower to descend, they did not comply. Consequently, the respondents decided to install safety mats. Five officers attempted to arrest the victim for obstructing public duties, hindering traffic, and violating the Assembly and Demonstration Act. However, the victim resisted, leading the officers to use what they described as minimal physical force.
□ The NHRCK’s Committee on Human Rights Violations 1 (Committee Chair: Standing Commissioner Kim Yongwon) determined that:
△ The victim repeatedly communicated with the officers, identifying himself as the union president, which was corroborated by video footage. Arresting the victim on the spot due to fear of escape or destruction of evidence lacked sufficient justification.
△ The victim’s resistance was limited to spraying water from a 500ml bottle, which was insufficient to justify the level of force used.
Although police regulations on the criteria and methods for physical force allow the use of handcuffs in cases of passive resistance, surrounding the victim with five or more officers, forcing him to lie face down on the asphalt, pressing his head, and holding him down while applying back handcuffs was judged to be excessive. These actions infringed on the victim’s physical freedom.
□ The NHRCK has thus recommended that the head of the OO Police Station conduct job training for investigators to prevent similar human rights violations in the future.
File