Controversy over South Korea’s freedom of expression has been rekindled following a recent clampdown that activists claim is gagging critics of President Park Geun-hye.

It was revealed earlier this month that the Seoul District Police Agency had sent instructions on how to clamp down on protesters to police stations across the city earlier this year.

In the documents, the agency listed guidelines on how to treat protesters, including those passing out pamphlets criticizing the president or her policies on the streets.

Those who distribute, paint or use graffiti to spread content criticizing or mocking the president or the government could be apprehended on the spot if caught red-handed, according to the instructions.

The guidelines were reportedly handed out after the agency found handouts slandering Park on the streets in Myeong-dong and the Hongik University subway station in late 2014.

Police have said that the guidelines in question were created to prevent unreasonable enforcement.

On March 12, police officers in Gunsan, North Jeolla Province, searched a printing office of activist Park Sung-soo, who reportedly distributed leaflets on which he printed a photo of President Park’s 2002 visit to North Korea and denounced the authorities’ clampdown on pro-North activists.

The activist is facing charges of defaming the president and a minor offense.

The courts also issued a confiscation warrant against an activist in Busan on Feb. 23.

Another activist named Byun Hong-cheol in Daegu is also facing a police investigation after he handed out pamphlets criticizing the government last month.

Some have reportedly been probed on charges of destroying others’ property or trespassing on private establishments after drawing graffiti on walls.

“In our handouts, we criticized the president in charge of the overall state affairs, not as an individual,” Byun was quoted as saying in news reports.

“Our intention is only targeted for the administration’s proper management of state affairs,” he reportedly claimed.

Pundits cautioned that recent moves by authorities may further damage Korea’s deteriorating status in transparency and freedom of expression.

Hanyang University law professor Park Chan-un alleged the target of the authority’s tougher oversight was not just confined to some entities or protesters, but citizens in general.


Park said the on-the-spot inspections and raids would eventually have a “chilling effect” on the whole of society, as they discouraged citizens from publicly expressing their political views in a free manner.

“It could also bring a loss of national prestige on the international stage, while Korea’s Constitution stipulates the freedom of expression of any individual,” he said.

Asked about the tolerance band, he cited the case of the United States, whose administration generally tolerates expression as long as it is not believed to pose a “clear and present danger” to the nation or social security.

“Korea’s case is irrelevant to public danger. It is just focused on the president’s honor (as to whether or not citizens defamed the president).”

Korea has seen its global assessment in the freedom of expression continue to fall over the past few years. The country’s rankings in media and Internet freedom have been demoted by the United Nations and the nongovernmental organization Freedom House.

France-based watchdog Reporters Without Borders, which ranked Korea at 31st in the media sector in 2006, lowered it to 50th in 2012 and 60th among 180 countries in 2015.

According to Transparency International, Korea ranks 46th among 177 countries in the Corruption Perceptions Index as of 2013. Korea scored 55 out of 100 ― it ranked 39th in 2010.

The Korean unit of TI said that the drop because the worst performing Korean prosecutors were being assigned to corruption.

On Feb. 25, Amnesty International said in its annual report that the second year of Park’s administration showed a regressive trend in the realization of human rights, citing various concerns, such as barriers to the freedom of assembly and expression, as well as the government’s increasing restriction on the freedom of expression by using the National Security Law to intimidate and imprison people.

Amnesty International took issue with the anti-North Korean National Security Law, which bans any activities that support or promote North Korea’s political ideas.

Following the authorities’ investigation into the activists, NGOs claimed the government was applying a double standard in terms of the freedom of expression, saying that it has, in contrast, taken a lukewarm stance toward conservative groups distributing anti-North Korea leaflets across the border.

Police have taken a back seat over the launches of balloons loaded with anti-Pyongyang leaflets, citing freedom of expression, despite concerns from neighboring residents upon North Korea’s retaliation threats.

“In contrast, police hampered our move to fly handouts in yellow balloons (in October) demanding an inquiry into the president regarding the Sewol ferry sinking disaster,” said a spokesperson for the civic group Democratic Rights Solidarity.

Police reportedly warned that the balloons could be a threat to passersby in the streets in terms of safety as the bundles of yellow balloons were again wrapped carried in bigger stick-type transparent balloons.

Professor Park argued that, in that case, the sending of leaflets to the North should be a bigger priority for a crackdown, as residents in the inter-Korean border districts fear that the propaganda balloons could spark provocations by the North.

Moves condemning the government continue to escalate.

An activist group at Korea University on March 18 urged for an immediate halt to a police investigation into the distribution of leaflets criticizing the president, saying it held back freedom of expression.

In a statement they criticized the police searching Byun’s home and his wife’s office.

“It is trampling on the freedom and rights of the people by probing someone for handing out leaflets that mention the president’s past ... police should stick to their duty of protecting people’s freedom and rights,” the statement said.

In the last three months of 2014, the criminal investigative authority stepped back from its earlier plan to carry out real-time monitoring of postings and messages of smartphone users amid a severe backlash from the public.

After being severely denounced over the past few days for its move to conduct alleged surveillance of ordinary mobile users, the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office said it decided to drop the plan.

There has also been recent debate over reports that the National Election Commission is considering revising the elections law to slap a penalty of up to 2 million won on those who post or spread comments online and offline that aggravate regionalism, especially during an election period.

Although the move was aimed to tackle out-of-control Internet arguments between politically hostile regions, the idea was also criticized for potentially damaging freedom of expression.

The issue of freedom of expression has also spread overseas, with the Japanese government stating on March 25 that it has brought up the matter of a Sankei Shimbun journalist being tried in South Korea on charges of defaming Park at the United Nations Human Rights Council.

The Japanese government has been claiming Tatsuya Kato, former head of Sankei Shimbun’s Seoul bureau, should not be “arbitrarily” punished for the “freedom of press that is the basis of democracy.”

Kato has been undergoing trial since October last year after his article in August delved into the whereabouts of Park during the April 11 Sewol ferry sinking tragedy.

By Kim Yon-se (kys@heraldcorp.com)