[Editorial] Changing attitudes on sexual violence is the responsibility of everyone

Posted on : 2019-09-10 17:19 KST Modified on : 2019-09-10 17:19 KST
Civic demonstrators celebrate the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold a sexual assault ruling against former South Chungcheong Governor Ahn Hee-jung on Sept. 9. (Shin So-young
Civic demonstrators celebrate the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold a sexual assault ruling against former South Chungcheong Governor Ahn Hee-jung on Sept. 9. (Shin So-young

On Sept. 9 the Supreme Court’s second division under Justice Kim Sang-hwan upheld an original court ruling against former South Chungcheong Province Governor Ahn Hee-jung, who was accused of sexually assaulting executive secretary Kim Ji-eun. The decision came 554 days after Kim’s initial allegations in March of last year, which – together with accusations of sexual harassment by prosecutor Seo Ji-hyeon – helped to fuel a MeToo movement in South Korea. This episode involving Ahn, someone once regarded as a strong presidential contender and a vocal figure on gender-related issues, came as a huge shock to South Korean society and served to foreground the issue of the abuse of power to commit sexual crimes. We welcome this verdict for establishing standards of “power” and “victimlike behavior” when it comes to sexual assault in the workplace.

While legal provisions have existed for “sexual acts based on workplace authority,” actual punishments were not especially severe. It is especially true that cases of intangible authority – i.e., those not involving violence or intimidation – have tended to be disregarded. In the first trial last year, the court acquitted Ahn on all 10 counts, arguing that “while authority may have existed, it was not exercised.” In contrast, the court in the second trial stressed that there was “no question of ‘tangible’ or ‘intangible’” when it comes to authority, clearly stating that perpetrators may use political, social, and/or economic status or authority rather than violence, intimidation, and other physical tactics alone. In other words, it stated that there is no distinction between the “existence” and “exercise” of power. The Supreme Court confirmed that this is consistent with precedent.

Indeed, while there have been multiple Supreme Court precedents in terms of “authority,” what really fueled the controversy over Ahn’s case was a misguided notion of “victimlike behavior.” Following her allegations, Kim had to endure a second form of victimization. She faced nonstop questions about whether the assault was not really an “affair.” The court in the first trial cited Kim’s actions the day after the assault as a basis for concluding that her testimony was not credible. In contrast, the second court acknowledged that her testimony was “consistent” and stressed that “the idea of ‘victimlike behavior’ is a narrow perspective” – sounding the alarm over the kind of re-victimization that is so rife in South Korean society. It also clearly stated that “gender sensitivity” should be actively considered when examining a victim’s testimony. This means that while the credibility and consistency of testimony should come under scrutiny, consideration in sexual assault trials should also be extended the full context and circumstances, including the situation faced by the victim and his/her psychological state and relationship to the accused. When the Supreme Court stated that the “actions shown [by the victim] around the time of the crime are not actions that would never be observed in a victim,” it could be seen as having underscored that the standard of “victimlike behavior” for determining the truth of a sexual assault has been mistaken.

At this moment, there are still many victims of sexual assault within the workplace who are unable to truly speak out about what they have suffered. Of the 819 workplace sexual assault counseling requests received by the Seoul Women Workers’ Association equality hotline last year, 78% reportedly involved “authority-based assaults” perpetrated by company presidents and workplace superiors. It’s time to stop asking victims why they didn’t “say no” or “speak up at the time.“ In the early 1990s, there was an incident involving a Seoul National University professor surnamed Shin that first ushered in a shift in South Korean attitudes on the sexual harassment issue. Hopefully, this latest ruling will not remain simply a matter of legal principles, but provide an occasion for establishing a culture that moves us firmly in the direction of sexual equality in the workplace and society at large. Changing attitudes is the responsibility of everyone.

 staff photographer)
staff photographer)

Please direct comments or questions to [english@hani.co.kr]

button that move to original korean article (클릭시 원문으로 이동하는 버튼)

Related stories