From: btlee@emx.cc.utexas.edu (Mr. Byungtae Lee)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.korean
Subject: Re:aftermath of election
Date: 30 Dec 92 09:26:51 GMT
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin; Austin, Texas

From: shin-jungshik@yale.edu (Jungshik Shin) writes:
:In article <85862@ut-emx.uucp> btlee@emx.cc.utexas.edu (Mr. Byungtae Lee) writes:
:>From: sl26@ellis.uchicago.edu (sangjin  lee)
:>(3) The Problem of the prisoners of conscience:
:>
:>         You are talking about at least 5 year ago Korea.
:    No, I'm sure he has as updated information as you have.
 
           I pointed out what his information was not correct. Give me
           your counter-arguments!           

:>         Possessing 'Das Kapital' does not violate any law in Korea now.
:>         Sorry  I had it in Korea.  Without forma form of organization,
:   No, students with 'Das Kapital' would not be arrested.However, last year
:graduate students in economics and sociology at SNU were arrested for
:their theses ,one of which had been already approved as thesis for MA by 
:the advisor of one of those arrested. The prosecutor insisted that they were
:arrested NOT for their theses BUT for distributing their theses to general
:public because the government feared that it would be criticized for
:oppresing freedom to study (or research, whatever it's called in English). 
:What difference is there between arresting graduate students for writting
:theses and arresting them for distributing them?  In whichever case, they are
:prisoners of conscience, aren't they?  

           I do not have any information to this specific case. In addition, 
           procecution is not verdict. If a procecutor suspects or believe that
           any body violates laws, any time he can procecute. You should judge
           whether or not court agreed that.  Do you have any followups?

:>         even your adovocate of communism can not be punished. I explained

:  Really?    Park, No-Hae (a famous poet) was sentenced to death or life in
:prison for advocating socialism and organizing anti-government organization
:(Socialist Worker's Union:Sa-No-Mang). Incidently, Sa-no-mang vigorously
:opposes the ideology of N. Korea. 
:Considering those mentioned above, do you really believe that National
:Security Law is not a bad law denying fundamental human rights guaranteed by
:Korean constitution such as freedom of thought and freedom of speech?

             Didn't I say that your communism advocacy can not be punished 
          without the formal organizaion which are judged to be beneficial
          to North Korea?   The judgement whether Sa-No-Mang belongs to this
          category is judiciary decision, nether mine nor yours.
          I DID that I hate this outdate security law!!!!
          But my arguments was whether violating this law should or should not
          be  punished.

:>  why Im/Moon case was different from the other case. 

: To you, they may not be prisoners of conscience,but to many members of
: AMNESTY international, they are very good examples of prisoners of
: conscience.
:  (See December or November,1991 issue of its newsletter featuring Ms.
:Im). Regardless of whether they violated current Korean law or not,
:they had been in jail for doing what their conscience ordered them to do 
:which is not against any basic moral standard. 

         Any concensus about law in a country is the accumulation of their
         history and cultures. I agree that they are prisnoers of consicence
         because their initial motivation was political.  Do you remember
         USA government censored press during gulf war? There is no
         absolute standard.  

         Here we encounter very subtle problem whenever we discuss about
         S-N Korean issues.  Isn't North Korea our enemy legally?
         Do you remember we still can not replace "the cease-fire treaty" with
         "peace treaty"? In fact, Korean government did not sign the former 
         either. Legally we can fire any time because we did not agree "cease
         fire."   I hope you can figure out the implications of this.  
       
:>         What aspect of labor laws of Korea is bad now?
:>         Do you know Korean government recently signed ILO treats and joined
:>         that organization?  Do you know korean labor acitivity law fully
:>         suuports all three fundamental rights now?  Do not speak out with
:>         outdate information. 

: Yes, it's true that S. Korea signed ILO,BUT, its labor laws do NOT
:conform to full standards of labor rights required by ILO. 
: For instance, KOrea
:does not allow teacher's union and does not allow three labor rights for
:most of civil servants. 

          You are simply repeating what I already said. 
          Then how can you explain the denial of teacher's union by the grand
          court and constitutional court? 
          I supported teachers' union and it is the fact that majority of 
          Korean, especially parents of students did not support that.
          Then What should government choice be? Can you blame government
          actioin to imposing the law? It seemed ridiculous to me too
         that old people were insisting eduction is not labor but some
         "noble" and "holy". But what can we do if it is our long cultural
         inheritance and highest court supported this? Do you think
         government should obey AMNESTY standard beyond its constitutional
         judgement?  I was very sad to see they changed "CHUN-KYO-HYUP" into
         "teachers' union" before they got enough supports from citizens.
         I did think that it was strategic mistakes of leaders. Another 
         example of unrealistic approaches. 

           I was not arguing that they are not "political prisoners", but 
          I was arguing whether they should not be punished or released
          because of their motivation only because of their motivation.
          My preference to any political movement has nothing to do with
          the legitimicy of laws. In addition, if we take account of the
          changes of political structures since 1987, can we give the same
          credit or respects or sympathy to those violaters?
          
:Did you ever hear that leaders of LEGAL labor
:union were arrested  IN the PLACE of NEGOTIATION with the owner of company
:in the US? Of course, that must have happened many years ago,but not now in
:the US. However, that has happened at least several times in Korea in 1992!
:Nominally, Korean labor laws seem to gurantee worker's right,but in
:practice, there are a lot of pitfalls and traps which can be used and
:actually have been used by government and owners to persecute labor
:movement.

         Are you talking about problem of laws or problem of selective 
        application of them?   Can you believe the "Perfect" codes of laws?
        I did not hear these cases. Please give me specific information about
        any one of these cases?  Didn't owner sue the labor union for violating
        something?   This is the most case of government intervention.
        Do you remember government did not intervened even though there 
        were clear violation from union sides in 1987 to encourage the
        "establishing self-solving capabilities" of interest parties?          

: (For instance, current Korean law does not allow multiple unions in
:a single company or workplace, which makes it impossible for workers to make a
:new union truly representing their rights 
:against existing 'fake' union obeying
:faithfully management's 'remote' control. )

         I almost sure it has been changed already.  Samsung was notorious
         for this trick. I can bring different issue here.
         Do you take account of the fact that in Korea, management or owners
         virtually do not have the power to fire employees
         unless you are not  criminal. This is totally different from USA.
        That's why we see far less pink slips.  We have to judge the labor
        laws based on our business culture and political balances. I hope
        I can provide my side analysis regarding this soon. I have plenty
        of questions especially for socio-political scientists.

:>         How can you explain the arrest of demonstrators in USA?
:>         Can you explain the difference between the assembly and demonstraion
:>       laws of two country?  Do you believe that in this crowded cities, any 
:>         form of demonstration should be allowed? Then why so many anti
:>         abortion demonstrators were errested who blocked clinics here.

:  Anti-abortion demonstrators violated law or at least prevented others from
:using their freedom to choose supported by the US Supreme court.   

         So do you agree we have the similar laws to USA?
         Don't the same things happen when we have demonstrations and 
         labor disputes?  Who compensated for burnt cars and shops?

: How do you explain that demonstration by pro-government organization is
:allowed even in the heart of Seoul while one by anti-government organization
:is not allowed even if it uses all legal procedures for it. 

         You are talking about the selective practice again. In the previous
         posting, I said that it was not problem of laws themselves 
         but the problem of power balance.

:>   
:>         I am not saying that Korean laws are perfect nor I am supporting 
:>         Korean government.

:    You seem to support Korean government very effectively by denying it.

           No matter what you think. However,
           I will not be ashamed to defend Korean government if I think it
           is blamed unfairly though.

:>  But for better discussion, I do believe we should
:>         be more specifically informed and more rational.

:  Then, would you please answer my question, why  Chong,Choo-young who
:  visited N. Korea even BEFORE the birth of S-N. Korea Exchange
: Law(Nam-Pook-Kyo-ryoo-Hyop-ryok-pob) seemingly without approval from the
: government ,unlike what you  wrote in your previous posting, was not punished
: at all.   

           You ignore the fundamental concept which governs this case.
           The question is whether you respect the sole authority of government
           controlling N-S issues. In addition, the procecution is the sole
           right of procecutors legally. There is no automatic procecution 
           except for only small number of special cases. If procecutors
           want, he can stop his procecution any time.
           Sometimes they do not procecute a murderer if they find the proper
           reasons.
           Thus, selective  procecution
           does not violate any laws legally even if you think it's unfaire.
           This judgement comes from the results of violation rather than
           mere violation. During war, if your citizen smuggles into enemy's
           country, he/she can be shot. But still government can send spies.
           
           Therefore selective procecution does not constitue the concept
           of "political prisoners" or excuses for violation laws.

: Final note to add : I don't think the poster of the article you followed
: up can be more rational than he has been. 

           Fine with me  if you think so.

: Jungshik Shin

           Byungtae Lee

P.S: Please do not bring any naming for my political attitude. If then,
     I won't continue to respond my opinions any more. This is my begging.
     Such personal attacks drive me almost crazy. Then I can not be rational.