International Mechanism Submissions

This report provides additional information on the human rights issues identified by the Committee Against Torture (“the Committee”) in its June 2020 List of Issues Prior to Report (“List of Issues”), with a particular focus on issues that touch on the death penalty and related issues.

The existing penal provisions fail to fully cover all acts of torture under the Convention, and in its List of Issues, the Committee requested information from the Government of the Republic of Korea (“South Korea”) on its attempts to define torture as a distinct crime and to ensure that the penalties for torture are commensurate with the gravity of the crime. The Committee also asked for information on whether the Government intended to accede to the Optional Protocol to the Convention Against Torture.

There have been reports of torture in South Korea being employed by Government officials, in particular in the military. The Government acknowledged human rights violations at a detention center for undocumented foreigners. The Constitutional Court in a 5-4 decision upheld the constitutionality of the 36-month alternative civilian service for conscientious objectors introduced in 2020 (case no. 2021 Hun-Ma 117, etc.), but it is considered punitive and the condition may be considered as deliberate infliction of severe pain or suffering for the act of conscientious objection.

In 2018, the Constitutional Court held that a detained person’s right to legal counsel applies to the administrative procedure, in particular the detention and deportation of undocumented foreigners, but this has not been codified by legislation and the immigration detention centers lack the private space for private meetings with lawyers. The Criminal Procedure Act stipulates that the prosecutor and police must allow the defense counsel to participate in the interrogation of a criminal suspect “unless there is good cause”, but there have been cases of the legal counsel being arbitrarily removed from the interrogation, as seen in the Supreme Court’s ruling in March 2020 (case no. 2015 Mo 2357). The curtailment of the prosecutor’s oversight of the police investigation in 2020 has raised concerns though the prosecutor can still investigate police misconduct under Article 197-3 of the Criminal Procedure Act.