 |
|
Kang Yong-ju smiles as he speaks with his lawyers following his acquittal on charges of failing to honor his reporting obligations under the Security Surveillance Act at the Seoul Central District Court on Feb. 21. (by Kim Myung-jin, staff photographer)
|
Kang Yong-ju was the youngest member in the “Western Illinois spy ring”
Kang Yong-ju, 56, was found not guilty on charges of failing to honor his reporting obligations according to the Security Surveillance Act after being released from a 14-year prison term as an unconverted communist prisoner. The decision, which was based on the court’s determination that Kang posed no risk of further National Security Act violations and could not be punished because a renewal of his security status would be unlawful, signaled a halt to routine decisions by the Ministry of Justice. Hon. Judge Jo Gwang-guk of Seoul Central District Court’s fourth criminal division ruled on Feb. 21 to acquit Kang on charges of violating the Protection and Surveillance Act. “The three renewals of [Kang’s] security surveillance status in 2011, 2013, and 2015 were in violation of the law without sufficient grounds for recognizing a risk of repeat offense,” Jo concluded. “If the status that provided the premise for assigning a reporting obligation was unlawful, then according to the principles of the rule of law, the defendant cannot be subject to criminal punishment,” he added. Kang was previously the youngest of the unconverted communist long-term prisoners, serving 14 years after refusing to draft a conversion statement following a life prison sentence of the 1985 “Western Illinois exchange student spy ring” case. (The “Western Illinois spy ring” refers to four students who were accused of spying for North Korea after three of them had allegedly met with a North Korean agent while they were exchange students at Western Illinois University.) Though he was eventually freed in 1999, Kang remained subject to security surveillance by the Ministry of Justice due to an alleged risk of repeat offense, with his status renewed seven times over an 18-year period. Individuals subject to security surveillance are required to report major activities over a three-month period to the head of the local police station. Kang refused to report, calling the measures a “violation of freedom of conscience.” Last year, he was indicted for a third time, following previous indictments in 2002 and 2010. The Security Surveillance Act allowed for sentences of up to two years in prison or up to 1 million won (US$920) in fines for failure to report. The court’s acquittal of Kang was seen as signaling that the Ministry of Justice will need to strictly establish its grounds for assigning security surveillance status to avoid violating basic rights. “The refusal to honor reporting obligations does not in itself serve as a basis for concluding that there is a risk of repeat offense,” Jo said. Defendant’s arguments are ruled to be in line with the South Korean constitution “The defendant has not repudiated the Republic of Korea’s system, and his arguments for abolishing and disobeying the Security Surveillance Act cannot be seen as overstepping the bounds of freedom of expression according to the Constitution,” he added. Jo also found no issues with Kang’s activities as a director with the Truth Foundation, an association of survivors of torture in connection with fabricated espionage cases, which police cited as one of their chief bases for renewing his security surveillance status. “This is a group working to investigate human rights infringements and assist the healing of victims, and all of its founders have received final acquittals after requesting retrial,” he noted. Other activities by Kang, including press interviews and contributions, activities as director of the Gwangju Trauma Center, and talks in connection with the May 18 Democracy Movement and Sewol ferry sinking, were judged to fall within the scope of constitutionally guaranteed freedom of expression and conscience. Jo also considered the stability of Kang’s social status as a physician. Court upholds constitutionality of the Protection and Surveillance Act With its conclusion that the Security Surveillance Act itself was not unconstitutional, the court remained at odds with members of the public who have called for its abolition. Many have taken to using the social media hashtag “#IAmKangYongju” to decry the act’s terms as constituting “double punishment.” “The Constitutional Court has twice ruled that the provisions serving as grounds for security surveillance status are not in violation of the Constitution, and the security surveillance system itself does appear to be necessary as long as the political and military antagonisms and tensions between South and North Korea are not completely resolved,” Jo said in ruling to reject Kang’s request to recommend an unconstitutionality hearing. “The obligation to report cannot be viewed as violating freedom of conscience, as it does not compel an individual to change his or her beliefs,” Jo added. After his acquittal, Kang thanked to the court for “making a difficult decision to honor its duty to uphold the rule of law and basic citizen rights.” “With this ruling, we have taken one step closer to a world where human rights, democracy, freedom, and equality permeate our lives like the air,” he added. The ruling means that the burden shifts once again to the prosecutors’ and Justice Ministry. Choi Jeong-gyu, an attorney with the law firm Jipyong who represented Kang, said, “With the court ruling upon close examination of the grounds for [Kang’s] security surveillance status renewals that there was no risk of repeat offense, the prosecutors need to respect this decision by not appealing, and the Justice Ministry by not renewing his security surveillance status.” By Kim Min-kyung, staff reporter Please direct questions or comments to [english@hani.co.kr]
