NHRC recommends Ministry of Government Administration and Home Affairs to issue a warning to the National Police Agency
NHRC recommends Chief of North Cholla Province Police to compensate victims for the injuries suffered at rally
From August 2003 to June 2004, KIM In-Kyung (55) and two co-representatives from the「Bu-an County Residents Committee Against Nuclear Waste Facility and Nuclear Power Plant」 filed petitions over four times with the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC). They claimed「the police violated the participants’ human rights.」 In response to these petitions, the NHRC concluded that:
1. The fact that the situation concerning Bu-an nuclear waste facility was not kept under control at an early stage but deteriorated is not only due to the faults of the chief of police himself but also the assistants for not having fulfilled their function; therefore the NHRC asked the Ministry of Government Administration and Home Affairs, the supervising authority of the Police Agency, to issue a warning to the Police Agency.
2. The NHRC recommended the chief of the National Police Agency to severely warn the chief of North Cholla Province police to establish a plan for the prevention of similar incidents from happening, to revise the regulations for the inspection and make inspection mandatory, and reclassify the same regulation from「classified」 (3rd degree) to a general document.
3. To the chief of National Police Agency and North Cholla Police Agency, the NHRC asked that they investigate the officers in charge and those who used violence to gather information and officially reprimand them according to the degree of responsibility. The persons in charge of research and direction at the sight should be warned
4. The NHRC recommended that North Cholla Province Police compensate the victims who did not participate in the rally yet were injured in the process.
5. Assistance from the Korean Bar Association for the victims should be requested.
The petition included points such as the police: (1) excessively suppressed a legitimate rally, (2) did so while intoxicated, (3) illegally searched the committee office, (4) only investigated the citizens in matters of illegal activities and not the police and used it as evidence for execution of private law, (4) illegally used shields and assaulted the citizens with stones or bottles, (5) illegally removed placards, (6) illegally put police officers into Nae So Sa temple, (6) put too many police in Bu-an Eup (town) thereby interfering with the traffic and limiting a peaceful rally, (7) sexually harassed female demonstrators and pregnant women in the course of taking them to the police station. As a result of the NHRC’s investigation, the Commission found that:
1. Regarding the Police’s excessive suppression and violence, the fact that the demonstrators used extreme methods such as trying to take over the provincial office, occupy highways, set fire to public facilities, throwing stones and petrol bombs, and driving into the police line with trucks and tractors was considered. However, in light of the fact that as many as 325 citizens were hospitalized, even when considering the urgency and confusion at the site, excessive force such as hitting the demonstrators with shields and police batons were in violation of the dignity and worth of the human person and the right to happiness as specified in Constitutional Law’s Article 10, equal rights in Article 11, and personal liberty in Article 12.
2. Regarding the takeover and search of 8 committee offices opposing nuclear power waste site on November 22, 2003 from 06:30~07:00, the NHRC acknowledged the fact that although there is no statement on the warrant that nighttime search is allowed, the search was illegally conducted before sunrise (the sunrise on the day was 07:15). The NHRC decided the search was in violation of Criminal Procedure Act Article 125 which prohibits nighttime execution of duties, and thereby violated personal liberty as specified in the Constitutional Law Article 12, the right to be free from intrusion of place of residence in Article 16, and the right to privacy in Article 17.
3. Regarding the unjust operation of research parties, the NHRC acknowledged that they did not investigate the activities of the police, yet one-sidedly investigated citizens and used findings as evidence for private law execution; this is in violation of the State Public Officials Act 56 which outlines sincerity, and the Code of Practice by Police Officers Article 2, thereby violating the dignity and worth of a person and their right to happiness as stated in Constitutional Law Article 10, and equal rights in Article 11.
4. Regarding inappropriate use of weapons, the fact that the police officers in question did learn the necessary procedures for using shields is acknowledged. However, because they did not keep up proper maintenance and safety inspection of them, citizens were injured from the edges of shields or from stones. The NHRC decided this was negligent to the prevention of human rights’ violations.
5. Regarding excessive control of residents’ freedom of movement such as the banning of all rallies and the suppression of traffic, the NHRC acknowledged that after an intense rally on November 19, 2003, police forces were increased from 8,000 to 10,000 officers assigned to 77 companies. These officers were mainly stationed in the Bu-an downtown area and blocked candlelight assemblies and broke up any parties of more than three persons after sundown. On main roads police officers holding shields and batons were stationed in rows of two or three, and conducted police questioning which did not follow the procedure and necessary conditions specified in the Code of Practice. They did not consider the actual danger in nighttime assemblies which is in violation of Article 21 stating freedom of assembly and association. The questioning was also in violation of Article 10 which protects the dignity and worth of the person, a violation of the right to lawful procedures in Article 12, and the right to move at will in Article 14.
6. The removal of placards was conducted by Bu-an Province and does not have any connection with the police. As for the argument of intoxication, violence against pregnant women, and abusive language towards female demonstrators, there is no evidence except for the petitioner’s claim. Also, regarding the use of force in Nae So Sa temple considering the duration of the Bu-an magistrate’s detention and the negotiation efforts of the police, the NHRC decided the incidents adhered to appropriate law enforcement. Therefore, the NHRC dismissed these claims.
The claim for sexual harassment was revealed as false, and the police took legal action for libel. The complaint was withdrawn afterwards, and the NHRC dismissed the petition as having no right of arraignment. –End.
