As the allegations of illegal interference by the National Intelligence Service (NIS) in the presidential election held in December last year drew increasing attention from the public, a search and seizure was carried out by the special investigation team at the Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Office (DPO) on April 30, 2013. Based on the materials confiscated, the Seoul Central DPO made the table (a record of evidence) relating to the alleged offences.
Major TV news corporations and newspapers were either prevented from broadcasting or were reluctant to highlight the issue. Instead, alternative independent media and online news agencies obtained the whole list and released it on the internet. Setting aside the allegation that the NIS deleted most of its comments/articles from the internet before the search and seizure was carried out, it was found that the whole list is massive, amounting to 2,120 pages. Through the efforts made by volunteering citizens, the list was digitalised and uploaded onto the website of Ohmynews in the public domain.
The legal interpretation as to the alleged offences of ‘illegal’ interference in domestic politics and elections will be later verified during the court proceedings. However, the contents of the list show far more than mere interference. They are not limited to the alleged offences but include spreading hatred, provoking mass killings against persons coming from particular provinces, praising military dictatorship and sexually abusive or discriminatory writing against female politicians belonging to the opposition party.
Although it ultimately rests on the role of the judiciary, the truth that is unchallenged is that the subjects who wrote the articles/comments over the internet are those who are agents (over 70 of them) from the psychological warfare team against North Korea under the NIS. In brief, the government institution – with its salaries paid by public taxation – under the direct control of the President, has systematically run a team disseminating ideas over the internet of mass killings, hatred, incitement to hatred, defamation and discrimination based on region or gender for a considerable amount of time. Thus, the issue itself is far more serious than what is currently being discussed by politicians, who have emphasised the alleged illegal interference in domestic politics and elections.
It is the obligation of the state to, on the one hand, guarantee the freedom of opinion and expression and, on the other hand, honour their responsibility to limit that right to the extent strictly required by law. The measures should not only involve discrimination on the grounds of race, colour, sex, language, religion or social origin. Any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence should also be prohibited by law.
More seriously, it has now been revealed that the NIS has been the main body that has spread the incitement to hatred, mass killings and provocation of regional discrimination.
Unfortunately, the scope of the investigation into state administration agreed on July 1 at the National Assembly, started from July 2 and running for the coming 45 days, does not cover the matter stated above. In fact, as foreseen (refer to previous statement), the investigation has already been disrupted due to politics.
In addition, under the current domestic circumstances, it seems that the National Human Rights Commission of Korea (NHRCK) is the only government body that is able to carry out an investigation into the discriminatory contents of the comments and articles. Noting that the NHRCK has recently issued a recommendation relating to discrimination based on race, the AHRC believes that the NHRCK is taking proactive steps to investigate the issues found above.
The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) strongly urges that a thorough investigation into the systematic dissemination of such ideas should be conducted, and it should be done separately from the current investigation into state administration. The investigation should include not only the former director of the NIS, but also should aim to find out whether orders were given by the former President, since the NIS is under the direct control of the President (in accordance with the NIS Act). Any materials confiscated but not incorporated into the table as evidence by the prosecutors’ office should also be available.
The above information may provide the legislature background information on what needs to be done in order to prevent government institutions from disseminating messages of hatred. With regard to this, the AHRC wishes to reiterate that, in order for the country to step forward towards greater democracy and reconciliation, it is a prerequisite for the public to know the truth.
