hankyoreh

In her Monday letter published Wednesday, Irene Khan, UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, wrote that she had received information “concerning amendments to the Act on Press Arbitration and Remedies for Damage caused by Press Reports [. . .] which, if adopted without further changes, may severely restrict the rights to freedom of information and of expression of the media.”

A UN human rights expert recommended that the South Korean government revise a planned amendment to the Press Arbitration Act to suit the standards of international human rights law, citing concerns that it could severely restrict freedom of expression.

A Monday letter by Irene Khan, UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, was published Wednesday on the homepage of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR).

In it, Khan wrote that she had received information “concerning amendments to the Act on Press Arbitration and Remedies for Damage caused by Press Reports [. . .] which, if adopted without further changes, may severely restrict the rights to freedom of information and of expression of the media.”

To begin with, she wrote that having acceded to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the South Korean government was obligated to “respect and protect the right to freedom of opinion and expression under article 19.”

She also wrote that while the stated intention of authorities was to build public trust in the press, the new law poses a serious risk of leading to the opposite outcome if it is adopted without revisions.

In terms of the amendment’s legality, Khan referred to the “Joint Declaration on Freedom of Expression and ‘Fake News’” issued by the UN special rapporteur in 2017, saying that the human right to share information and ideas is not limited to accurate claims.

For restrictions on false information to be recognized as lawful, a close and concrete connection would need to be established with Articles 19-3 or 20 of the ICCPR.

Article 19-3 states that freedom of expression may “be subject to certain restrictions, but these shall only be such as are provided by law and are necessary” for “respect of the rights or reputations of others” and “for the protection of national security or of public order.”

Article 20 prohibits “any propaganda for war” and “any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence.”

“I worry that the draft Press Arbitration Act, as it currently stands, confers excessive discretion to the authorities that may lead to arbitrary implementation,” Khan said.

In terms of the need for the law, she commented on the vague wording of a special rule in the amendment on false reporting, which would allow punitive damages to be imposed in cases where media outlets act in a “grossly negligent” way.

Khan warned that this could restrict extensive freedoms essential for a democratic society, including press reporting, unpopular or minority opinions, and criticisms of the government, political leaders, and other public figures.

She also noted that these concerns could become amplified ahead of the presidential election scheduled to take place in South Korea in March 2022, which represents a time when information access and the free flows of ideas are particularly important.

She further noted the severe threat to press freedom in cases where journalists could potentially be forced to reveal their sources to counter the charges against them.

She went on to voice serious concerns that excessive punitive damages could lead to self-censorship by the media or suppress important debates concerning the public interest, calling the draft law’s measures “utterly disproportionate.”

Urging the South Korean government to share her concerns with the members of the National Assembly, Khan called for an explanation as to how the amendments to the Press Arbitration Act would conform to international human rights law — particularly the government’s obligations to uphold lawfulness, necessity, and proportionality in accordance with Article 19 of the ICCPR.

She went on to call for the amendment’s revision “for the purpose of bringing it in line with international human rights standards.”

UN special rapporteur activities do not possess legally binding force, but they are reported to the UN Human Rights Council.

By Kim Ji-eun, staff reporter

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