Non-implementation of gender parity employment guidelines violates the right of equality:
NHRC issues recommendation to MOGAHA
The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) issued a recommendation to the Minister of Government Administration and Home Affairs (MOGAHA) to implement the “Targets for Gender Parity in Employment” at the Public Prosecutors’ Office (PPO) in recognition of the violation of equality rights by the PPO’s discriminatory conduct in employment. The recommendation follows a complaint filed by a Mr. Kim (male, 31) in January 2003 against the MOGAHA charging that the MOGAHA failed to implement gender parity targets in employing clerical and support staff at the Prosecutors’ Office.
Ms. Kim (female, 30, acquaintance of the complainant), the victim in this case and applicant for a PPO, grade 9, support staff position, had received notification that the guidelines for hiring government employees of grade 9 had switched from targeting increased employment of women to targeting gender parity as of 2003. She had expected that the gender parity targets would apply to her, since the PPO support staff are government employees; however, when the PPO rejected her application, found that the PPO had decided against implementing gender parity targets in employment. The decision not to implement is what inspired the complaint.
The NHRC investigation found that article 11: 3 (cases for which the number of female or male applicants passing the civil service exam may exceed planned appointment levels) of the Decree on Civil Service Exam for the Appointment of Public Officials amended on 26 December 2002 stipulates that “when needed for enhancing gender equality in government official employment opportunities, the number of appointees at each level of the civil service exam may temporarily exceed the number of planned appointments to permit the hiring of men or women toward maintaining a prescribed ratio.” Additionally, the implementation guidelines of the employment targets for gender parity explicitly state that in civil servant exams for grade 7 or grade 9 administration, diplomacy, or technical staff, in cases where over 5 persons are to be hired, the gender parity employment targets must be observed.
However, the MOGAHA decided not to implement the gender parity employment targets for PPO clerical and support staff, correctional officers, and juvenile protection positions.
The MOHGAHA responded that, “in the case of the PPO, investigative support staff must help carry out punishment and arrest of suspects and/or the accused, and they often have to work at night. After considering those job duties, we decided not to implement gender parity targets for those jobs; however, if it is deemed that there is no reason for non-implementation of gender parity owing to changes in job duties, then MOGAHA can negotiate with the PPO to implement the gender parity targets.”
The Ministry of Justice, which oversees the PPO, opposed implementing the gender parity targets citing the following reasons: “if the numbers of women in the ministry of justice increase, then (1) they’ll create trouble when prosecutors undertake forcible searches, (2) if we have to hire women to meet predetermined employment targets, then even if the women are not as qualified as the men, just because they are women we would have to accept them and this might constitute reverse discrimination against qualified men, (3) if every year we regularly employ women who have lower exam scores, then women in the PPO will be come to be belittled and disparaged and the entire PPO staff morale will sink.”
The NHRC concluded that (1) even though a certain amount of physical strength may be necessary for arresting suspects, PPO civil servants do not carry out such duties single-handedly, (2) because of the complete lack of concrete evidence suggesting that women are unable to carry out such job duties simply because of their gender, it would be difficult to acknowledge these claims as fact, and last, (3) if excessive physical coercion were used in making suspect arrests or in other areas of investigation, on the contrary, this would carry the possibility that the PPO officers were violating suspects’ human rights; thus, the PPO should proactively employ women and change support staff job duties by enlarging the PPO repertoire of investigative methods so as to encompass diverse investigative methods, including DNA analysis, detective work and so forth.
