The National Human Rights Commission of Korea (NHRCK) will express an opinion regarding revisions to the Anti-Discrimination and Remedies for Persons with Disabilities Act (“Disability Discrimination Act”) enforcement decree, which was promulgated on April 10, 2007.
The Ministry of Health and Welfare drafted a bill for an enforcement decree of the act and announced on December 4, 2007 that the Ministry would press for the passage of the bill in the National Assembly.
The Disability Discrimination Act designates the Commission as the responsible government body for providing remedies in the case of discrimination against persons with disabilities. As the human rights of persons with disabilities are not well protected, the Commission reviewed the enforcement decree bill in order to ensure the most effective implementation of the Disability Discrimination Act, and found it necessary to recommend alternations to the bill.
The nine-point opinion to the Minister of Health and Welfare is as follows:
1. Article 4 (Education Institutions) of the bill lists the types of “Other Educational Institutions” mentioned in Article 3, Item 6 of the Act. Article 4, Item 2 of the bill includes the phrase “Overseas educational institutions as per Article 2 of the Act on Educational Support for Overseas Korean Nationals.” The Commission believes that “overseas educational institutions” must be clearly specified, such as “qualifying overseas education institutions as defined and stipulated by this Act”;
2. Article 8 (Phased Application to Education Institutions) must be rewritten. Item 1 coarsely states, “The scope for phased application to educational institutions as per Article 14, Item 3 of the Act will be similar to Appendix 2.” Furthermore, another item needs to be added to clarify that “all educational institutions shall provide due conveniences” In addition, while Item 2 requires educational institutions outside the scope of Item 1 (or Appendix 2) to make efforts to provide due conveniences, the imposition of such an obligation appears to be outside the purview of delegated legislation. This item should, then, be deleted. The scope of educational institutions in each phase should be defined and specified in the appendix;
3. Articles 11 and 12, which set forth the access to and use of facilities, should also be reconsidered for revision. Article 11 of the bill indicates that the facilities subject to Article 18, Item 4 of the act and its phased application include only those newly built, expanded, or renovated on and after April 11, 2009. It should be revised to include all “existing buildings.” Article 12 of the bill states that the content and installation criteria of due conveniences shall be defined in accordance with Article 4 of the Enforcement Decree of the Convenience Promotion Act. The bill must specify the specific services concerned;
4. Articles 13 and 14 of the bill set forth the scope of facilities subject to the phased application and types of due conveniences with regard to mobility, transportation, and driver’s license testing. These articles should be revised to address the appropriate facilities and the types of conveniences stipulated in the Enforcement Decree of the Act on Mobility Promotion for the Mobility Challenged, and leave open the possibility of including more facilities, types of conveniences and related human services;
5. Article 14, Item 2 of the bill states that if a “driving school or similar such facilities for persons with disabilities” requests the head of a driving license testing institution to send testing resources for driving license testing (driving skills tests and on-road driving tests), the head “may” provide the requested support. “Driving school or similar such facilities for persons with disabilities” should be replaced with DRIVING SCHOOL, and MAY with SHALL;
6. Article 15, Paragraph 2, Item 1 should be revised to clearly state that web sites should not be the only means to accessing electronic information, and should also include specific ways to provide convenience. The scope of events provided for by Article 15, Paragraph 4 should be widened and a new paragraph should be added to stipulate the details of services required to support such events;
7. The timing of the phased application to culture and art businesses set forth in Appendix 4 as per Article 16, Paragraph 3 must be advanced. There is also no compelling reason to categorize culture and art businesses, as they are for different phases. The categorizations need to be readjusted;
8. The timings of the three phases of application to sports facilities stipulated in Appendix 5 as per Article 17, Paragraph 3 should be advanced by one year, three years, and five years after the effectuation of the act. The term “municipalities’ state or public facilities,” which is defined as a type of sports facility, is inappropriate because it has no clear legal definition. The term should be replaced with one that is defined in accordance with the Enforcement Decree of the Installation and Utilization of Sports Facilities Act. A variety of amenities will also need to be provided; and
9. Finally, a paragraph should be added in order to provide child care services at work or corresponding services for women with disabilities, who work at workplaces other than those mandated to install child care facilities in accordance with the Enforcement Decree of the Infant Care Act.
The National Human Rights Commission of Korea was established in 2001, offering investigation and remedy services for Korean citizens and foreigners residing in Korea against human rights violations and discrimination. The Commission provides policy recommendations and remedial action against human rights infringements, collaborates with international human rights organizations and implements educational programs to improve the human rights culture.
