The following article is an opinion piece by Suh Ho, vice minister of South Korea’s Ministry of Unification. Views expressed in opinion articles and columns are exclusively the author’s own and do not represent those of NK News.

On Dec. 14, the South Korean National Assembly passed an amendment to the Development of Inter-Korean Relations Act that regulates leaflets. Critics in South Korea and from overseas — including the U.S. — misunderstood the intention and the contents of the amendment, all while organizations scattering leaflets issued distorted denunciations of the amendment. 

To protect the lives of residents living along the border, the amendment bans loudspeaker broadcasts, posting visual materials near the Military Demarcation Line and scattering leaflets or sending other items. But in order to understand this amendment, one must understand issues concerning the violation of freedom of expression and how it is related to North Korean human rights.

The two Koreas already agreed to cease mutual slander and leaflets in the July 4 South-North Joint Communiqué of 1972. Both Koreas have agreed to this over several administrations, and also in the recent 2018 Panmunjom Declaration. 

However, military tension between the two Koreas escalated because some organizations scattered leaflets despite South-North agreements and a series of requests from the government and border region residents. Today, the lives of 1.12 million people living along the border area are repeatedly threatened, daily lives and economic activities are restrained due to imposed safety measures and fear, and the local economy is suffering as less tourists visit the area. 

The people have constantly pleaded with the National Assembly and the government to stop leaflets. From 2008, the National Assembly began the legislative process and discussion for regulation. Between June 19 and June 20 of this year, a survey conducted by the National Unification Advisory Council showed that 61.5% of South Korean people surveyed agreed with the government’s policy to regulate leaflets. In another survey of Gyeonggi province residents, 71% of respondents said that leaflets should be stopped and 59% of respondents said that leaflets threaten their lives.

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights stipulates that “the freedom of expression can be restricted by law when there is a need to respect other’s rights, maintain national security or protect public order.”

The Constitution of the Republic of Korea also stipulates that “the freedom of expression can be restricted by law in cases of need to assure national security, maintain order and promote public welfare.”

Leaflets can be restricted based on the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Constitution, as it infringes on the right to life and safety of 1.12 million people in the border regions. Leaflets also inflict harm on national security by building up tensions between two Koreas and beget conflict between border region residents and organizations. 

In 2016, the Supreme Court of Korea also ruled that “leaflet scattering, which causes danger to people’s life and safety, cannot be protected under the freedom of expression.” The amendment protects the freedom of expression while imposing minimum restrictions on the “method” to protect people along the border area. The logic is in line with rulings made in different courts including the U.S. Supreme Court. 

Moreover, one is not penalized just for sending leaflets, but is punished only when the action inflicts harm on people’s life and safety or generates grave danger.

Violating the right to life of South Koreans for North Korean human rights is an irresponsible and ineffective act that endangers people. There exists no evidence that scattering leaflets improve North Korean human rights. On the contrary, it endangers defector families in the North by strengthening the government‘s control and brings adverse effects to North Korean human rights. Many defectors in South Korea even testified that malicious insults against the North Korean government do not contribute to improving human rights. 

Efforts by the civil society and the international community to improve North Korean human rights are important. However, expanding inter-Korean dialogues, exchanges and cooperation — and widening North Korea’s contact with the international community — are more effective to accomplish such a goal. 

Also, clarification on the scope of the act is required. This law only restricts leaflets and items scattered or sent from South Korea to North Korea. The clause regarding the third country applies to items sent from South Korea that passes through a third country due to oceanic currents or air currents. Leaflets scattered from a third country will be subject to the laws of the relevant country. The Korean government will thoroughly prepare necessary follow-up measures for clear implementation.

Critics in South Korea and overseas should base their discussion on objective facts. It is clearly incorrect to see the amendment as a law upholding Kim Yo Jong’s orders and to link its process, which started in 2008, to a statement made by the North Korean leadership in 2020. 

Overseas critics should understand that the purpose of the ROK National Assembly is to protect the right to life — which is arguably the most important right to mankind — by minimally regulating certain means of freedom of expression. North Korean human rights organizations in and out of South Korea should promote peace on the Korean Peninsula and practically improve North Korean human rights away from measures that threaten the lives and safety of South Koreans and escalated South-North tensions with no effect.