온 국민 명예회복 대책본부!

국가가 명예훼손 주체 될수 없어/ 연합뉴스

희망둥이 re-hope — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 15:03:03 +0900

http://www.yonhapnews.co.kr/bulletin/2010/02/09/0200000000AKR20100209129700004.HTML?did=1179m

연세대학교 광복관에서 열린
'국가는 민,형사 명예훼손 소송의 원고가 될 수 있는가?'라는 제목의 학술대회에서
충남대 법학전문대학원 김태선 교수님은 '국가는 이런 명예훼손 소송의 주체가 될 수 없다'고 말씀하셨네요.
김 교수님도 정부 비판의 자유가 봉쇄되는 결과에 대해 우려하고 계십니다.
국가는 명예훼손을 주장할 것이 아니라 자유로운 비판과 소통을 보장하는데 힘써야 한다고 말하시네요.

이런 세미나에는 정원씨가 필히 참석해야하는데 말이에요!

크리에이티브 커먼즈 라이선스

이 저작물은 크리에이티브 커먼즈 코리아 저작자표시-비영리-동일조건변경허락 2.0 대한민국 라이선스에 따라 이용하실 수 있습니다.

"퍼포먼스도 못하게 하는 더러운 세상"

희망둥이 re-hope — Sun, 31 Jan 2010 19:04:57 +0900

1월 29일자 미디어스의 헤드라인 20자평입니다.
http://www.mediaus.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=9335

왜 이런 20자평이 나왔을까요? 그건 바로 정원이의 사찰 때문입니다.
민간사찰은 사찰을 대상으로 이루어져야 제맛인지,
안국동의 사찰 조계사에서 진행 예정이던 진알시(진실을 알리는 시민 모임)의 행사를
취소하게 만드는 사찰 행동을 저질러 버렸네요.

그래서 조사해봤습니다. 다음에서 최신 기사를 검색해보니, 한 페이지에 나온 기사 10 개 중 6개가 이에 관한 기사였습니다. 국정원 직원이 조계사 사찰을 방문했다는 뉴스도 있고, 불우이웃돕기 행사에 간섭했다, 시민단체 수신료 퍼포먼스 취소 압력을 넣었다는 기사들이 있습니다.

위에 간략히 이미지 캡쳐된 기사들의 출처를 링크로 모아봅니다.

"국정원, 조계사에 전화...시민들 기부행사 취소"(경향신문)
"국정원 직원, 조계사 찾아간 까닭은"(경향신문)
"[사설]국정원이 불우이웃돕기 행사까지 간섭하나"(경향신문)
"국정원 직원, 직접 조계사 방문"(미디어오늘)
"조계종, 국정원 직원 조계사 출입금지 조치"(오마이뉴스)
"'MB맨' 국정원장의 MB 향한 헌신?"(한겨레)
"수신료거부 행사 방해한 KBS, 공영방송 자세 아니다" (미디어스)
"조계사, 국정원 직원 출입금지"(뉴시스)
"조계사 "행사장소 대여 국정원이 왜 압력 넣나"(더데일리)

기사들의 내용을 간단히 요약해보면,
진알시 등 시민모임이 주가 되어 조계사 앞에서 불우이웃돕기 위한 라면 쌓기 및
KBS수신료 거부를 위한 TV쌓기 퍼포먼스가 예정되어 있었는데,
국정원 직원이 전화 및 방문으로 조계사 측에 압력을 행사했고
조계사 측에서 시민모임이 조계사 경내에서 행사를 진행할 수 있도록 허가한 사항을 번복했다는 것입니다.
이에 대해 조계종 종단 차원에서는 우려를 표하며 국정원의 자제를 요청했고,
해당 직원이 조계사 경내에 출입하는 것을 금지했다고 하네요.

정원이는 KBS수신료 거부를 위한 퍼포먼스도 참기 힘들었나 봅니다.
예술 감각이 부족해서 그런걸까요.^^a
(그런데 이런 소식도 조중동은 기사로 다루지도 않네요. 왜 그런지 참 궁금합니다.^^a)

정원이는 사찰을 좋아해서, 조계사로 갔나봅니다.
간김에 템플스테이라도 하며 수양도 하고 불우이웃돕기 행사도 참여하고
퍼포먼스도 보며 예술적 소양을 높였으면 좋았으련만,
KBS말고 다른 채널도 보며 세상을 공부했으면 좋았으련만,

정원이는 그저 사찰만 좋아하나봅니다.
그런데 이제 더이상 조계사는 갈 수 없다고 하니,
정원이가 그저 안쓰러울 뿐입니다.

크리에이티브 커먼즈 라이선스

이 저작물은 크리에이티브 커먼즈 코리아 저작자표시-비영리-동일조건변경허락 2.0 대한민국 라이선스에 따라 이용하실 수 있습니다.

한 외국인 학자의 눈에 비친 <대한민국 vs 박원순> 사건

희망둥이 re-hope — Sat, 02 Jan 2010 21:43:42 +0900

다음은 Cheryl Woelk (한국명 권세리)라는 캐나다 학자가 쓴 글인데요. "권력, 패턴, 그리고 국민들 : 대한민국 대 박원순 사건의 분석"이라고 하는 논문입니다. 다소 긴 글이기는 하지만 이미 <대한민국 대 박원순>사건이 이렇게 국제적인 관심의 표적이 되고 있습니다. 한편으로는 자랑스럽지만 또한편으로는 창피하기 짝이 없습니다.

대 한민국의 인권수준이나 민주주의수준이 이 정도밖에 안된다는 것을 만방에 알려지는 것이니까요. 사실 외국의 저의 지인들이나 여러 단체들이 이 사건에 대해 이리 저리 소문이나 뉴스를 듣고 놀라움을 금치 못하면서 저에게 뭔가 힘이 되는 노력을 하겠다는 것을 저는 한사코 말리고 거절하여 오고 있습니다. 그럼에도 이렇게 저렇게 많이 알려지고 있는 것을 보면서 이미 인권의 국제화, 지구촌화를 실감하고 있습니다.

Cheryl Woelk씨는 한국에 유학한 바도 있고 지금은 캐나다의 Eastern Mennonite University에서 공부하고 있습니다. 한국 사람이 아니고서는, 한국에서 살지 않고서는 이해하고 파악하고 설명하기 어려운 여러 정치.사회적인 문제들을 이렇게 잘 분석하고 있나 하는 생각이 들었습니다. 함께 공유하고 싶어 블로그에 올립니다. 권세리씨가 Lisa Schirch 교수가 담당하는 Analysis-Understanding Conflict 라는 과목에서 발표한 것이랍니다, (Center for Justice and Peacebuilding :http://www.emu.edu /cjp/).

일부 도표등이 잘 안보여 유감입니다만 필요하신 분에게는 Cheryl Woelk 씨의 허락을 받아 보내드리도록 하겠습니다. 아직 완성되지는 않았고 저에게 논평을 부탁한 것인데 너무 내용이 좋아 본인의 허락을 받아 여러분과 공유하는 것임을 밝힘니다.

Power, Patterns, and People: An Analysis of 'Republic of Korea vs. Won-Soon Park'

Cheryl Woelk

Eastern Mennonite University

December 16, 2009

This conflict analysis explores the defamation suit filed on September 14, 2009 against Won-Soon Park, a prominent civil society leader and human rights lawyer, by the National Intelligence Service (NIS). The NIS charged Park with defaming the ‘state’ after he asserted in an interview in June that NIS had been illegal investigating businesses supporting civil society organisations. The underlying political dynamics in South Korea during the time of suit make this an intriguing case for analysis. The administration under Myung-bak Lee, now in his second year of office, has been accused of gradually implementing censorship and other such acts against democracy. Most members of the administration take a conservative view on political issues in a country with a strong right-left divide and a history of dictatorship and emergent democracy. The analyses tools help understand why a government would sue a well-known civic leader and spokesperson for human rights. This conflict grows out of a complex system of power, patterns, persons, and public which have been seeking stable democracy for over half a century.

The absence of sufficient research and information access from both sets of key actors limits this analysis. Much of the research found about this conflict came from personal websites, progressive non-government organisations (NGOs), and progressive news media. The issue did not appear in detail in the major broadcast media, or in government documents. No references could be found expressing the underlying interests and needs of the government or state actors. Much of the analysis related to perspectives not represented in the media, then, stem from historical analyses and observations from local and international political analysts. The limitations make this work a starting point for dialogue at best.

I will begin by exploring factors contributing to the conflict and apply analysis tools to understand multiple perspectives. I will then look at factors contributing to peace in order to identify ideas for peacebuilding efforts. Next, I will complete an assessment of my own role in this conflict including my motivations, abilities, and limitations. Finally, I will make specific recommendations for possible programs or interventions related to this conflict.

Factors Contributing to Conflict

Who are the stakeholders?

The two main stakeholders, as shown in Figure 1, are Won-soon Park and the National Intelligence Service (NIS). The government includes President Myung-bak Lee, who has a role as an individual actor and has a strong alliance with NIS as a branch of the government. Park and Lee knew each other when Lee was mayor of Seoul and supporter of Beautiful Foundation (Park, 2009). Lee was elected president in December 2007, by a margin of 48.6% with a 60% turnout of voters (BBC, 2007). Some credit Lee’s victory to the absence of a strong opposition candidate. Others argue people voted in reaction to economic struggles experienced under the progressive former President Moo-Hyun Roh (Klingner, 2007). Another view asserts that the majority saw Lee as a politically moderate candidate (Chae & Kim, 2008). By 2009, however, Lee’s approval rating had dropped lower than 17% (KBS, 2008). The dashed line in the stakeholder map denotes this shaky relationship between the majority of the South Korean people and the leadership.

The civil society stakeholder circle indicates progressive civic groups and NGOS, including three founded by Park: Beautiful Foundation, The Hope Institute, and People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy (PSPD). They have ties to progressive political groups and to the people, and get much of their funding from partner businesses and institutions.

Media and Asia Human Rights Commission also appear on the map. Several bills related to broadcasting passed in early 2009, prompting a reaction from progressive groups resisting government control of media (Na, 2009). The zigzag line between the media and progressive political groups represents this distrust. The Asia Human Rights Commission influences the South Korean government and has publicly denounced the lawsuit against Park (AHRC, 2009).

According to Park’s personal website, he and Lee also connect through Seung-Yoo Kim, who facilitated Hana Bank’s donation projects and served on the board of the Beautiful Foundation (2009). Park and Kim had been planning a joint local micro-finance program. Hana Bank withdrew from the project without explanation, however, and Kim is now chair of Smile Microcredit Bank, established by Lee just days after the suit against Park (Lee S. Y., 2009).

Key

Alliance

Strong alliance

Direction of influence

Active conflict

Broken alliance

Civil Society & Progressive NGOs

PSPD

Beautiful Foundation

Major broadcast media

South Korean people

Seung-Yoo Kim

National Intelligence Service (NIS)

Won-soon Park

Businesses & institutions funding the NGOs

South Korean government

Smile Microcredit Bank

Myung-bak Lee

Hope Institute

Asia Human

Rights

Commission

Progressive political groups

Cheryl

Figure 1: Stakeholder Map, NIS vs. Park Won-soon (2009)

Why are the stakeholders acting the way they do?

To analysis reasons for stakeholder behaviour, I have examined the positions, interests, and needs of the key stakeholders, explored each side’s motivations in search of legitimate grievances, and discovered more about key individual stakeholder’s worldviews, including identities.

While analyzing the positions, interests and needs of key actors (see Figure 2), I have included the perspectives of Won-soon Park and of a larger NIS and government combined. NIS interests are in aligning itself with government policies and direction, because as one representative explained, the NIS is the “hub of the state” (Noh, 2009). In the past, NIS has been a tool for government manipulation, even against civil society (Kim S. H., 2000, p. 54). The NIS says that Park’s comments against the government defame the Republic of Korea. Park claims in his position that as a citizen of the Republic of Korea, he cannot accuse himself (Noh, 2009). Park also wants the NIS to stop pressuring businesses to withdraw funding from NGOs and to cease illegal surveillance of citizens (Park, 2009).

The state’s interest lies in regaining control or power, particularly from public opinion. The operation of a government microcredit program may provide necessary connections to the public (Lee S. Y., 2009). Park, on the other hand, is interested in civil society’s role as separate from the state. He asserts that some aspects of society, such as the microcredit program, best belong in the hands of the public, not the state (Lee S. Y., 2009). His history of involvement in encouraging fair business practices, and a clear democratic government also show his interests in developing a healthy Korean society (Kim H. S., 2009).

For Park, a strong underlying need seems to be a sense of participation in society and connection with the people of Korea. The NIS and government needs of autonomy, effectiveness, and recognition seem to connect more with the human needs of its leaders, including Myung-bak Lee.

Physical security

Dignity and respect

Connection

Sense of participation in society

Positive identity

Autonomy and effectiveness

Recognition from public

Connection with public

Security

Cognitive consistency – view of government’s role

Won-soon Park

Government must stop illegal surveillance over citizens and trying to control NGO funding

“It’s ridiculous to consider a criticism of one part defamation of the whole”

“The state must accept the criticism of the people, who rule of the state.”

“A lawsuit for doing an interview can only be for some political intention”

NIS/Government

Park’s criticism against the government was wrong

“Speaking against the NIS is the same as speaking against the whole of the state”

“Criticism without evidence does irreversible damage”

“Making accusations in a public interview without proof is libel”

Fear of losing power

Decrease power of civil society

Implement microcredit program instead of NGO to increase Lee’s public support

Funding for NGOs

Freedom of speech

Democratic government

Civil society to do its role well

Figure 2: Onion Tool and Human Needs Analysis, Won-soon Park and NIS / Government (2009).

Table 1 shows the motivations of Park and the NIS or government. Park seems to have legitimate grievances about the use of illegal government surveillance, limitations on freedom of speech and the repression of civil society (Park, 2009). Park denies possible motivations of greed such political power or excessive NGO funding. The state’s motivations to increase public support and connect with the public may be valid (Yonhap, 2009), but the methods of going about this and the motivations of restricting funds, suing a citizen, and implementing the microcredit program Park had initiated seem to represent greed more than grievance.

Won-soon Park

NIS / Government

Motivations representing legitimate grievances

Elimination of illegal surveillance use

Freedom of speech

Civil society empowered by government not repressed

Increase in public support

Connection with public

Motivations representing “greed”

NGO funding?

Possible political motivation?

Implementation of microcredit program

Restriction of funds for NGOs

Control over media, speech

Table 1: Greed vs. Grievance Tool, Won-soon Park and NIS / Government

Looking at a worldview and identity analysis of the key actors in Table 2 provides more insight into their backgrounds and behaviours in the conflict. Both Won-soon Park and Myung-bak Lee, who has the most influence in the government and NIS, have stories set in the context of South Korean history. They start out similarly and both may be symbolic of the change in Korea over their lifetimes (Kang, 2008). They came from low social-economic status, reached university through hard work, and were arrested for their involvement in student demonstrations during the authoritarian regime (BBC, 2008; Ismartono, 2007). After being released from several months in jail, their paths drastically differ. Lee worked his way up the ladder at Hyundai, one of the major conglomerates responsible for labour abuses and later transformed by the labour movement to provide better working conditions (Kim S. H., 2000). Park made his way as a lawyer into a government prosecutor position, met a prominent human rights lawyer, and changed his direction to assist political prisoners and those fighting for democracy (Logarta, 2009). They both seek the best for their country, but Lee’s vision includes economic development first, while Park asserts the role of civil society in envisioning a better future. These worldview differences significantly impact their actions and attitudes in this conflict and the context of civil society and state.

Won-soon Park

Myung-bak Lee

Life experiences

Born in rural area of Kyong-san province

Sent to school in Seoul

Admitted to Seoul University

Arrested for protesting against regime

Jailed for four months

Studied history at Dankook University

Passed bar exam

Government prosecutor for two years

Practiced human rights law

Leadership in democratic movement

Professor & scholar in Korea & overseas

Co-founded PSPD – 1994

Monitored elections in 2000

Founded Beautiful Foundation – 2000

Founded The Hope Institute – 2004

Hope Institute Executive Director

Born in Japan under occupation, then moved back to Korea

Self-supported during college

Arrested for protesting Japan-Korea relations

Jailed for three months

Labourer at Hyundai company

Worked up to CEO at Hyundai

CEO of Hyundai from 1977-1992

Leadership in construction & engineering associations

Korean Olympic committee member

National assembly representative

Leadership in economic & trade associations

Mayor of Seoul – 2002-2006

President of South Korea

Cultural groups

Rural hometown – Kyong-san Province

Background of poverty

No religious allegiance

Rural hometown – Kyong-san Province

Background of poverty

Dominant Christian group

Identities

Married

Father of 2

‘Social Designer’

Civil society leader

Human rights lawyer

Professor

Male

Early-50s

Progressive political views

Visionary

Fundraiser

Married

Father of 4

‘Bulldozer’

President

Business man

Economist

Male

Late-60s

Conservative party

Presbyterian elder

Millionaire

Values

Democracy

People-centred social change

Generousity

Community

Hope

Always do my best

Economic-centred social change

Commitment

Family

Hope

Education

High school in Seoul

B.A. in history

Diploma in International Law from London School of Economics and Political Sciences

Professor, Seoul School of Integrated Sciences & Technologies in 1994

Visiting Professor, Stanford University Visiting Fellow, Harvard Law School Human Rights Program

High school concentration in commerce

B.A. in business management

Several honorary doctorate degrees

Table 2: Worldview and Identity Analysis, factors shaping Park and Lee’s understandings of conflict

Core grievances in this conflict consist of democratic values and the recognition of the government, which do not necessarily stand against each other. However, the methods in which stakeholders act on their motivations collide. These actions stem from diverging worldviews about improving the country and society. Peacebuilding efforts could work to limit destructive aspects of actions and to help each group understand the common ground with each other.

How do the stakeholders shape the conflict and through what means and sources of power?

In this context, relatively high awareness exists about the issues, but levels of power remain somewhat unbalanced. Because of the history of civil society movements, the influence of NGOs under the Roh administration, and the strength of public opinion as demonstrated in responses to Lee’s negotiations about beef imports during the FTA talks with the U.S (Kang, 2008), though, power between civil society and government is not completely unbalanced (see Figure 3). Awareness of the suit may be limited to supporters of Park and consumers of alternative media. Capacity-building and community organising could strengthen both the balance of power and awareness.

Figure 3: Power and Awareness Diagram, Park vs. NIS conflict in relation to strategic peacebuilding

The power and means analysis tool provides helpful insights into this conflict situation. In looking at how stakeholders are dependent on each other, several cycles are apparent, such as in Figure 4 which complicate the relationships and draw attention to the systems theory at work. In this case, the government has power over both supporting business and the South Korean people, but also depends on them for compliance and support. In the same way, businesses and the people support NGOs, including Won-soon Park, but they also need the services and political development that the NGOs bring.

Figure 4: Cycles of Dependence, Park vs. NIS

While identifying sources of power for different stakeholders, Figure 5 shows that economic resources and identities of authority strengthen the state, while networking and mobilisation abilities give power to civil society. The history of the democratic movement in South Korea gives civil society not only the physical power of numbers, but a moral and spiritual power as well (Kim S. H., 2000). The availability of information, economic resources, and military power is limited to a few stakeholders only.

Stakeholder	Source of power
Civil society	moral or spiritual power networking abilities, relationships with others, and the ability to mobilize masses
Asia Human Rights Commission	moral or spiritual power
People	access to information (internet) networking abilities, relationships with others, and the ability to mobilize masses identity (as the public)
Supporting businesses & institutions	economic resources
Won-soon Park	identity (gender, position as civil society leader, authority as human rights lawyer) personal ability education (knowledge and skills) the personal power of charisma networking abilities, relationships with others, and the ability to mobilize masses
Progressive political groups	networking abilities
Major broadcast media	access to information
South Korean government	Physical or military strength economic resources
Myung-bak Lee	identity as president, personal background as mayor, CEO of Hyundae education (knowledge and skills) the personal power of charisma
NIS	Physical or military strength economic resources

Figure 5: Stakeholder Sources of Power

A pattern of sorts emerges as seen in Figure 6 in relation to power in the dynamics of the conflict and in what ways stakeholders use power as a means to wage conflict with each other. From one perspective, Lee uses his power in the government to target Park as a representative of NGOs, thereby influencing progressive political groups, and even according to some predictions, threaten democracy in South Korea (Im, 2009). Another scenario could have other members of the Lee administration influencing his decisions, or the insertion of the microcredit program and the public as additional stakeholders affected by the power dynamics.

Figure 6: Use of Power to Wage Conflict

The analysis tools of means and power point out a second conflict between the Lee administration and civil society. The government’s power over information and the NIS creates the means to act destructively. An increase in public awareness would strengthen the voice of the people, and limit the government ability to pressure business or civil society groups. International attention to this destructive government behaviour would also add to the peacebuilding efforts.

Where or in what context does the conflict take place?

The nested model tool, the cycle of violence map and the connectors and dividers tools provide a sense of larger context. The nested model tool in Figure 7 shows the conflict between Park and the NIS as the central issue in this case. The relationship would be the government and civil society groups, a relationship which has been strained in the last year under the Lee administration (Kim Y. T., 2009). All of this takes place in the larger system of democratisation in South Korea, which has been an ongoing process since the end of Japanese occupation in 1945 (Cumings, 2002).

Figure 7: Nested Model Tool, Park vs. NIS conflict in context

The cycle of violence tool in Figure 8, points to larger issues of structural violence leading to destruction on state, community, and individual levels. The larger structural violence of political instability and a struggle for power between conservative and progressive groups since the emergence of democracy leads to disparities in voice and expression, and levels of repression within society. The economic inequalities within South Korean society also play a role in this divide as the people who “have” seek to maintain social and political status quo. The high level of militarization in society, the perceived threat or concerns because of conflict with North Korea, the presence of U.S. military, compulsory military service, and a strong social hierarchy based on age, gender, and status may also contribute to violence on community and individual levels. There is no clear causality to domestic violence and abuse, bullying and school violence, or alcohol abuse and the highest suicide rate of all OECD countries (OECD, 2009), but these likely arise as secondary effects of structural violence. In the Park vs. NIS conflict, some of these structural factors may also affect decision-making and behaviour.

Figure 8: Cycle of Violence Tool, Park vs. NIS in context of larger structural violence in South Korean society

Looking further into the context of the conflict, the presence of sources of tension and dividers are outlined in Table 3. From an institutional perspective, the influences on the media through government law-making, and the use of the NIS as a means to target civil society and their supporting businesses cause tension. Related actions and attitudes add to this divide. Shared values and interests have a tendency to polarize society into the left and right, civil society and government. Although the symbols and occasions listed in the table occurred prior to the lawsuit against Park, the implications from those events continued to impact public opinion when news of the lawsuit was released (Kim Y. T., 2009). I will identify connectors and peacebuilding efforts in the discussion of factors contributing to peace.

	Dividers or Sources of Tension
Systems & Institutions	Media support for government position NIS pressure on civil society leaders Businesses withdrawing support from NGOs
Attitudes & Actions	Public criticism of government Law suit against a citizen Withholding information about why business withdrew support from NGOs Formation of Smile Microcredit with Seung-Yoo Kim
Shared Values & Interests	Civil society, NGO, and progressive political viewpoint Government, media, and big business viewpoint
Common Experiences	Civil society being pressured, reminders of former regimes
Symbols & Occasions	Death of president Roh who had civil society connections Yongsan tragedy – connected implications

Table 3: Dividers or Sources of Tension, in South Korean context surrounding Park vs. NIS conflict

The context essentially drives this conflict in that the processes of democratisation, economic and political struggles create the setting for the government to repress civil society leaders and groups. A third main conflict between progressive and conservative political groups appears through these tools. Peacebuilding efforts must also address this polarisation of political views.

When is the conflict taking place in the context of historical patterns?

The timeline tool in Table 4 shows some interesting patterns in the history of South Korea in the relationship between the state and civil society. This timeline begins with the Japanese occupation, which continues to shape Korean society. According to Son-hyok Kim, political science professor and author of The politics of democratization in Korea: The role of civil society, a key legacy from the thirty year Japanese occupation “was the emergence and development of a pattern of ‘conflictual engagement’ between the repressive state and the resistant civil society.” (2000, p. 24). After the Korean War, South Korea experienced two extended periods of authoritarian rule under which civil society was largely suppressed. The democratic movement grew out of these regimes and the former leaders of civil society came into political society. As Kim suggests, this caused an “identity crisis” for civil society groups who could no longer follow the clear pattern if the state did not play the repressive role (2000, p. 110). Some organisations sought to change their identity and find ways to work together with political society. PSPD, founded in 1994 by a group of 200 including Won-soon Park, is one organisation seeking to bridge political and civil groups as a “watchdog against the abuse of power” (PSPD, 2008). This loss of identity reappeared during the Moo-Hyun Roh administration from 2002-2006. The Hope Institute, established in 2005 by Park, encourages citizen participation in research and local level policy change (2009) and seeks to bridge across civil society and state, breaking the pattern. Under the Lee administration, however, it seems similar patterns have returned, such as massive demonstrations and the use of the NIS to carry out state objectives. These patterns likely influence the current conflict between Park and the NIS.

State	Date	Civil Society
Continual decline in approval rating Economic repression Major media leaders resign, new leaders support Lee administration policies	2009	Lawsuit against Won-soon Park Illegal government surveillance of citizens Former President Roh’s suicide – result of investigation from Lee administration Government takeover of major broadcast media Yongsan incident
Successful KORUS FTA negotiations	2008	FTA demonstrations
Myung-bak Lee elected president, promising economic reforms	2007	Lack of a strong opposition candidate leads to a minority government
Pressure from U.S. Bush administration for Free Trade and cooperation in Iraq war	2006	Roh fails to bring about promised change, sends troops to Iraq despite protests
President Moo-Hyun Roh elected	2002	President Moo-Hyun Roh elected with strong voting turnout, younger generation
Inter-Korean summit, Sunshine Policy promotes relationship between Koreas	2000	Inter-Korean summit, Sunshine Policy promotes relationship between Koreas
IMF crisis President Dae-Jung Kim elected	1997	Former political prisoner Dae-Jung Kim elected president
President Young-Sam Kim elected, implements major democratic reforms	1992	Civil society groups experience “identity crisis”
Olympics hosted in Seoul	1988	Increase in people’s and citizen’s movement groups
Tae-Woo Roh elected with minority vote after Dae-Jung Kim and Young-Sam Kim run separately Chun agrees to direct presidential election system	1987	Opposition party loses election because of split Great Labour Struggle Coalition of civil and political society ends regime
	1985	New Korea Democratic Party formed led by Young-Sam Kim and Dae-Jung Kim
Political relaxation towards civil society Economic growth increases substantially	1983	Student, labour, and church movements increase
Declaration of martial law by Doo-Hwan Chun	1980	Kwangju Uprising – massacre of demonstrators
Doo-Hwan Chun takes control of KCIA Chung-Hee Park assassinated by director of KCIA	1979	Increased labour disputes, formation of unions Violence repression of labour strike
Chung-Hee Park wins election over Kim Dae-Jung	1971
Economic repression, drop in growth	1970	Labour movement gains momentum
Rapid economic growth Korean-Japanese relations normalized	1965	Government repression through KCIA Demonstrations about Korean-Japanese relations
Military coup led by Chung Hee Park Establishment of KCIA (now NIS)	1961	Democratic political parties and progressive civil society groups prohibited by Park government
Rhee withdraws at request of Korean people	1960	April Uprising – student demonstrations against National Security Law abuse and election rigging
Korean War 1950-53	1950	Korean War 1950-53
Republic of Korea formed Syngman Rhee, first president	1948	Syngman Rhee supports only conservative and anticommunist civil society groups
U.S. Military Government	1945	Repression by U.S. military government
	1919	Violent repression of independence movement
Japanese occupation of Korea	1910	Japanese occupation of Korea

Table 4: Timeline Tool, Government and civil society in Korea and South Korea

In terms of stages of conflict, Figure 9 shows the relative levels of latent conflict and crisis between the state and civil society over one hundred years. The movement towards crisis appears to rise at the time of the Park and NIS conflict. At each crisis “peak,” civil society rose up against the state or the state used violent repression against the people. In either case, the crisis at these points became visible.

Figure 9: Stages of Conflict, the state and civil society in 100 years of Korean history

Movements of growth of civil society over these one hundred years were prompted by economic decline, violent repression of demonstrations, and attempts of the government to make anti-democratic changes to the law and constitution. While these “windows” prompted growth and support for civil society, they were also moments of vulnerability which often led to violence and further repression by the state as seen in Table 5. An interesting point is that none of the major civil society movement has been influenced by South Korea’s relationship with North Korea. One would think that any rise in tension with the North would impact the people’s perspective in the south, but it has really mainly been an excuse for the government to pass security laws and make use of the NIS. A comparison graph of conflict between North and South Korea might be helpful to verify this observation.

Windows of Vulnerability
In the past	Violent repression of demonstrations by the government and “martyrdom” of demonstrators Attempts by government to make anti-democratic changes to laws or constitution Combination of economic decline and political repression
2008-2009	Global economic downturn, beginning under Roh’s administration Deaths at Yongsan demonstrations Suicide of former President Roh following NIS investigation KORUS FTA negotiations despite protests
Future possibilities	Changes to laws or constitution by Park administration Competition surrounding next election Death of anyone (especially demonstrator) due to police or government responsibility Continued economic decline

Table 5: Windows of Vulnerability, in South Korean context past, present and future

Overall, the tools of time context explain responses of civil society and political groups to the lawsuit against Park within a fourth, historical conflict pattern. Behaviours relate to this particular incident, carrying decades of memories. The historical struggles and traumas experienced by Korean society through the transition from occupation, to authoritarian rule, to democracy continue to shape the political and civil movement. Possible trigger events such as suppression of demonstrations, the deaths of significant persons, or government passing of laws amidst public protest would be points to watch for in peacebuilding efforts.

Factors Contributing to Peace

Who are key actors who could play a bridging or third side role at each level?

As stated above, Won-Soon Park, NIS, the government, and Myung-bak Lee could be considered key stakeholders. Other stakeholders, though, are very involved in the conflict as seen from a broader perspective. Looking at the peacebuilding pyramid in Figure 10, the conflict takes place across the top and middle range levels, and also influences the grassroots level.

Figure 10: Peacebuilding Pyramid, Social Capital Tool and Third Side Roles, in South Korea state and civil society conflict

Fostering vertical social capital in a Confucian-based society is difficult because of the nature of hierarchies where one must rule over the other and obligations change according to the hierarchical relationship, whether due to moral or other kind of power (Kim S. J., 2002). One builds vertical social capital either by connecting with someone above the person in question, or building relationships in a sort of zigzag format, working “up” the triangle. For example, a former president might have capacity for peacebuilding in the roles of Arbiter or Mediator at the top leadership level. Unfortunately two very good possible third side roles, former presidents Dae-Jung Kim and Moo-Hyung Roh both passed away in 2009. Young-Sam Kim would be the only other appropriate person for that role. Others below Lee, but closer to him might be possibilities as well, but would be limited to the Mediator role at most. Chief of staff, Jung-Kil Jung has qualities required for a Mediator role, including a close proximity to Lee, a background in education, and closer in age to Park. Prime minister Woon-Chan Jung might also be a good connection. Park and the prime minister already know each other and Jung may be open to peacebuilding efforts.

On the middle level, Won-Soon Park himself has capacity for peacebuilding and already plays a third side role of Witness, pointing out injustices, Equalizer, seeking to empower the people’s voice, and Teacher, creating social change through his organisations. With his increased popularity and support following the lawsuit, Park’s options for engaging in peacebuilding efforts both in civil society and political society could expand. Pastor Jin-Hong Kim, a leader in the “New Right Movement” might be a potential Bridgebuilder or Teacher from the middle range leadership level. In a 2008 interview, he talked about his support for the Lee administration, and his relationship with Lee, while at the same time encouraging further communication with civil society and transparency in the government (Yonhap, 2008). One of the goals of his organisation is to strengthen a conservative voice within civil society so that dialogue between progressives and conservatives can begin at the social level.

At the grassroots level, key efforts for peace could be building bridges between conservative and progressive groups within the public, providing support and encouragement for government leaders, and constructively critiquing and holding the government accountable to address the needs of the people. Dialogue between conservative and progressive groups might be a role for local NGOs, such as Women Making Peace Conflict Resolution Center, Korea Anabaptist Center, or the Frontiers, a peacebuilding organisation based in Korea. Care should be taken for those in the third side roles of Teacher and Bridgebuilder to address issues of power, but look at underlying needs rather than criticize. As Park observes, progressive groups in Korea too often criticize without making specific suggestions on how to move forward and make change (The Hankyoreh, 2009).

As far as outsiders playing third side roles, the Asia Human Rights Commission already acts as a Witness and could also adopt a Peacekeeper role if necessary. While international groups may be able to play third side roles of Witness or Peacekeeper, outsiders would likely not be successful in the roles of Bridgebuilder, Mediator, or Arbiter within the context of South Korean society.

Connecting with groups and individuals at each of these levels might provide a start for peacebuilding efforts through dialogue and relationship-building. It would be important to identify appropriate third side roles in the different levels, groups and individuals for a Korean cultural context.

Why might stakeholders be motivated to support and work for peace?

Addressing the “why” question in planning peacebuilding efforts would require meeting the needs of each stakeholder as described in Figure 2: Onion Tool and Human Needs Analysis. The underlying needs of the government involve recognition and autonomy while the underlying needs of Park, and possibly civil society as well, would be participation in society and a sense of dignity and respect. Taking into account the worldviews of different key actors would be necessary in order to create a space for dialogue to find common ground.

On the macro level, existing incentives for peace, as seen in Table 6, would include the pressure on the government from the public about the lawsuit against Park, the comments of the Asia Human Rights Commission which threaten international attention, the need for solidarity during an economic recession, and the need for civil society to continue to function in its role for a healthy society. Strongest incentives are internally created, such as needs for a functional society and political stability. A fear of losing a hard-won democracy and memories of the “Chung-Hee Park” regime of the 60s and 70s appear in several opinion columns. The public feels an urgent desire to achieve peace and sustain democracy.

Civil Society

State

Political and economic stability

Functional civil society

Fear of losing democracy

Fear of authoritarian regime

Political and economic stability

Public approval

Pressure from Asia Human Rights Commission

Possible international attention

Table 6: Incentives for Peace Analaysis, civil society and the state in South Korea 2009

How can sources of power foster social capital and increase peace?

The most appropriate responses for peacebuilding programmes would involve forms of community organizing and capacity building as seen in Figure 3: Power and Awareness Diagram. There may also be a need to wage conflict non-violently if the government continues to use its power over the public to repress groups and individuals. Also, increased awareness of the public will draw on the people’s power which have been shown in the past to be quite successful in creating change if aligned in solidarity (Kim S. H., 2000).This awareness would also impact the patterns of use of power as shown in Figure 6: Use of Power to Wage Conflict between government leaders, civil society, and progressive political groups. Looking from a systems perspective may also shed light on factors contributing to peace or conflict. The systems in which South Korea participates exist within the regional and global political and economic systems, which may provide additional incentives for peace or for continuing in conflict.

Where can peacebuilding efforts foster institutional and cultural resilience in the context?

Fostering institutional and cultural resilience seems key factor to the larger dynamics of this conflict. As a relatively new democracy, South Korean people may have incredible resilience, but the democratic system has yet to develop sustainability. The conflict between Park and the NIS may serve to nurture resilience, if leading to resolution through peacebuilding efforts rather than destructive conflict.

In Table 3: Dividers or Sources of Tension, I examined sources of tension in the conflict. In Table 7, I compare these to connectors and local capacities for peace, and suggest peacebuilding efforts that might decrease dividers and increase connectors. Peacebuilding efforts might include dialogues among divided horizontal groups, support and further development of diverse media for increasing awareness, advocating for transparency from the government particularly in terms of NIS actions towards civil society, and sharing common stories that pull groups together. Healing processes might also be something to explore in relation to the traumas that the Korean society experienced, whether recently with the Yongsan tragedy, or from historical traumas during authoritarian regimes.

Dividers or Sources of Tension

Peacebuilding Effort

Connectors & Local Capacities for Peace

Systems & Institutions

Media support for government position

NIS pressure on civil society leaders

Businesses withdrawing support from NGOs

Broaden alternative media sources

Increase awareness of NIS pressuring

Increase incentives for businesses to support NGOs

Prepare for next elections by right-left dialogue now

Internet infrastructure in disseminating information

Organized civil society groups with capacity for improvisation

President limited to one term

Attitudes & Actions

Public criticism of government

Law suit against a citizen

Withholding information about why business withdrew support from NGOs

Formation of Smile Microcredit with Seung-Yoo Kim

Publicize dialogue between Park and NIS leader

Highlight central views in news releases about lawsuit

Encourage transparency in government communication

Park’s initiative to dialogue

Public supporting central views more than progressive or conservative

Ability to gather public effectively and quickly

Shared Values & Interests

Civil society, NGO, and progressive political viewpoint

Government, media, and big business viewpoint

Find common ground between polarized groups

Civil society publicize support to democratic aspects of government

Find ways to cooperate between state and civil society on social and economic issues

Commitment to democracy

Shared interest in economic development for the country

Shared interest in using nonviolent methods

Shared commitment to caring for weakest members of society

Common Experiences

Civil society being pressured, reminders of former regimes

Define democracy together based on historical experience

Recall stories of resilience and hope from democratisation process

Resilience under previous regimes

Emergence of democracy

Economic recession

Symbols & Occasions

Death of president Roh who had civil society connections

Yongsan tragedy – connected implications

Encourage dialogue and healing processes related to deaths

Identify hope-filled symbols and occasions that both groups affirm

Korean heritage

Table 7: Local Capacities for Peace and Resilience, and Connectors and Dividers Tools

Local capacities for peace exist within civil society. Civic groups have strengths in improvising solutions, organizing community members, and organizing support from the outside if necessary. One weakness, however, would be a lack of cultural tools for managing differences and tensions between groups. Prior to the Japanese occupation, Confucian principles led society and managed differences and tensions. While society is still influenced by Confucianism, most people no longer practice these models and would not necessarily find them appropriate for modern Korean culture. Perhaps a peacebuilding effort would be exploring historical models and creating new tools for bridging differences.

When might be good opportunities for peacebuilding efforts?

In the past, windows of opportunity have often appeared when a large majority of the public stood together in solidarity. Another window came with the hosting of the Seoul Olympics in 1988. The attention of the international community put pressure on the government to meet the needs of demonstrators.

Windows of Opportunity
In the past	Violent or nonviolent demonstrations with a large majority of the public involved. Olympics held in Seoul in 1988 – International attention
2008-2009	Lee’s apology to the public about beef imports following FTA demonstrations Death of former president Dae-Jung Kim
Future possibilities	Acts of transparency by Lee administration Common purpose requiring state and civil society cooperation

Table 8: Windows of Opportunity

One recent window of opportunity was Lee’s apology in response to massive demonstrations over beef imports in the FTA negotiations. Also, while the suicide of former president Moo-Hyun Roh increased tension with accusations of NIS investigator involvement, former president Dae-Jung Kim’s natural death as a national hero was grieved by all political groups. At that moment, a commitment to reconciliation may have been possible should it have been presented. In the future, concessions or acts of transparency made by the Lee administration, or some event which presents a common goal or struggle which requires state and civil society cooperation.

Self-Assessment

Who am I in relation to the stakeholders?

On the stakeholder map, my strongest relationship is a personal connection to Won-Soon Park through my spouse’s involvement in The Hope Institute programs, and Park’s role as a mentor to him. I have also worked closely with members of PSPD and Beautiful Foundation. I have social capital with several different civil society groups, mainly progressive groups, although a few with more central views. My third roles include Teacher, as a trainer and peace educator, and possibly Bridgebuilder between grassroots groups along the lines of conservative and progressive dichotomies.

Why am I involved in this conflict and how do others perceive my motivations?

My motivations in doing this analysis come from my past experiences in Korea. I have close friends and family in Korea and I need to know their society is stable, secure, and will continue to be a place where they can live in peace. I have worked with NGO groups and civil society especially in the Seoul area, and have gotten to know Won-Soon Park. While my biases and experiences side more with a progressive perspective, I want to hear and understand the perspectives of conservative thinkers, including family members and loved ones who hold these views. I would like to understand more of the current political context in South Korea including the polarization of political views, in relation to the historical struggle for democracy in the country. I want to understand why a government led by someone I thought committed to democracy would sue a prominent civic leader and human rights advocate.

I am also motivated by the expectation of future involvement in South Korean civil society. In order to support and implement peacebuilding efforts in partnership with Korean peacebuilders, I need to understand the relationships, experiences, and feelings from all sides. I am interested in peace for South Korea and for Korean peacebuilders to use tools available for their context to build peace in their society, in the North-South Korean conflict, and in larger regional issues as the Korean peninsula has potential to implement strategic peacebuilding efforts for Northeast Asia.

Perceptions of my motivations, however, may differ from my intentions. I have communicated with Won-Soon Park about this project and he seems to understand my motivations and limitations. Civil society groups that I have worked with in the past may be interested in my involvement and willing to listen to thoughts or ideas. Stakeholders that I do not have a personal relationship with may see me as an outsider trying to interfere or provide an unwelcome solution. My gender and age might not be helpful in this case. When asking questions about Korean politics or history I have sometimes heard “you’re not Korean, so you can’t understand.” This could be a perception from some stakeholders and limit their support for peacebuilding efforts involving me, despite my motivations to listen, learn, and understand more. On the other hand, as a Korean speaker and an outsider, I may also been seen as a helpful ‘sounding board’ for ideas and for stakeholders to talk about the conflict freely. In this case, my age and gender aid in creating a non-threatening presence. I have experienced this “privileged other” position in the past as an opportunity to listen reflectively and build bridges between groups that may not otherwise have a chance for communication.

How do I use my means of power in this conflict and how will it shape peacebuilding efforts?

Main sources of power that I have are education, including both English and Korean language skills, and social capital in Korea, Canada, U.S., and many other countries. In aligning myself with issues of peacebuilding, I may also draw on moral or spiritual power. I do not have access to economic resources, large networking capabilities, nor any type of physical or military strength. I have limited access to information about the state and NIS. I am also limited by my outsider status, gender, and age. This will shape my involvement in peacebuilding efforts. My primary role will be to support ongoing efforts, rather than initiate new programs or draw people together. I can provide educational resources, ideas from other contexts, and encourage peacebuilders in Korea.

Where do I fit in the context in terms of my understanding?

I am an outsider with no formal education in the South Korean context, or extensive knowledge of historical, political or social dynamics in the country. I am fluent in Korean, however, and have a general understanding of the main issues in society and politics. I also have many opportunities and sources for acquiring knowledge. This analysis acts as an initiative into further learning.

When can I respond to the conflict?

At the moment, I do not have the capacity to respond to any immediate needs. I can only plan to send this analysis to Won-Soon Park for his review and response. I am committed to peacebuilding in Korean society over the long-term, however, and can work at capacity building and education efforts which take longer to develop, implement, and evaluate.

Recommendations for Possible Peacebuilding Efforts

In summary, the analysis reveals several layers of conflict surrounding the Park vs. NIS lawsuit. The closest conflict lies within the Lee administration pressure on civil society groups through business support as well as the Smile Microcredit program. These conflicts both exist in the context of a progressive and conservative political split. All of these relate to the historical state vs. civil society conflict and the patterns of “repressive state” and “resistant civil society.” Each of these conflicts requires peacebuilding efforts. Since they are all related as part of a system, efforts for one conflict may also influence other conflicts. Below are a summary of suggested peacebuilding efforts focused on each.

Park vs. NIS Lawsuit

In the Park vs. NIS lawsuit, finding arbiters or mediators in top leadership positions, bridgebuilders who might be able to dialogue with Park, or supporters of Park would be one possibility. Keeping Asia Human Rights Commission informed and monitoring the lawsuit case in courts would be another way of witnessing and refereeing the conflict. Highlighting transparent and object media releases of the lawsuit might help to draw mid-level and grassroots support. Park’s initiatives seem most important, including publication of any dialogues with the NIS or other third side roles in which he participates, his website releases and interviews, and the petition “Delete My Name” signed by Korean citizens, in whose name the lawsuit was filed.

Pressure from Lee administration on Civil Society Groups

Witnessing roles seem to be important for responding to the pressure of the Lee administration on civil society groups and their supporters. Increasing awareness of the NIS pressuring through broadened alternative and major media sources, finding other incentives or approaches for businesses to support NGOs, encouraging transparency in government communications, and giving specific suggestions for change in the model of The Hope Institute’s think tank would be tasks that civil society groups and NGOs could undertake. Perhaps an appreciative inquiry approach of responding with encouragement to positive acts from Lee administration might be helpful in reaching the underlying needs of recognition and approval. In order to bridge relationships, civil society could also seek connections with the government for partnership in common goals that the Lee administration and civil society both aim to achieve.

Conservative and Progressive Political Split

The larger social conflict of the conservative and progressive polarization requires long term efforts. Prominent civil society leaders, professors, and lawyers can act as bridgebuilders and teachers to bring together opposing views and initiate constructive dialogue on shared issues. Building awareness of public power in democracy, the significance of turnout in voting, and dialogue in preparations for the next elections might be helpful to initiate. Opportunities for building relationships between conservative and progressive views at grassroots, middle, and top levels could happen through dialogue, defining democracy together, and recalling stories of unifying resilience and hope from the democratisation process. Organisations doing peace education can help people to learn about peacebuilding, create a vision for society together, provide practice in skills for dialogue and discussion on sensitive topics, and assist in developing cultural tools for managing tensions and difference.

Historical State and Civil Society Pattern of Conflict

On the historical level, education can provide an increase in awareness of patterns between state and civil society and watch for those patterns being played out. Healing processes from historical wounds and recent collective traumas such as the suicide of the former president and the tragedy at Yongsan might aid in addressing emotional needs. Identifying clear hope-filled symbols which bring together people from all perspectives can provide reminders of a common vision. Peace education including historical studies of democratisation processes from other contexts, and awareness of systems and patterns can offer possible insights into future direction for society.

Concluding Remarks

In this analysis I have explored the factors contributing to conflict surrounding the lawsuit against Won-Soon Park, factors contributing to peace in the context, an assessment of my role, and possible recommendations for peacebuilding efforts. Relationships of balanced power, awareness of patterns from history, and listening to the voice of the people rose out of the analysis as key themes for promoting sustainable democracy and creating a stable society. I trust that this analysis can contribute to ongoing dialogue and understanding for peacebuilding in South Korea.

References

(2009). Retrieved December 12, 2009, from The Hope Institute: http://eng.makehope.org/

AHRC. (2009, October 9). Defamation against an activist by intelligence agency. Retrieved October 15, 2009, from Asian Human Rights Commission: http://www.ahrchk.net/ua/mainfile.php/2009/3286/

BBC. (2007, December 19). Lee wins South Korea's election. Retrieved December 12, 2009, from BBC News: http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/asia-pacific/7150806.stm

BBC. (2008, February 25). Profile: Lee Myung-bak. Retrieved December 14, 2009, from BBC News: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7150162.stm

Chae, H., & Kim, S. (2008). Conservatives and progressives in South Korea. Washington Quarterly , 77-95.

Cumings, B. (2002). Civil society in west and east. In C. K. Armstrong, Korean society: civil society, democracy, and the state (pp. 11-35). New York, NY: Routledge.

Im, J. S. (2009, December 04). Han-guk jung-bu-ga mol tu-ryeo-wa-ha-neun-ji mo-reu-gaet-da / I don't know what the state is afraid of. Retrieved December 12, 2009, from Hankyoreh 21: http://h21.hani.co.kr/arti/special/special_general/26215.html

Ismartono, Y. (2007, March 27). Interview with Park Won-Soon. Retrieved December 14, 2009, from The Leaders: http://www.spf.org/the-leaders/library/16.html

Kang, D. C. (2008). South Korea’s not-so-sharp right turn. Current History , 107 (710), 256-262.

KBS. (2008, June 4). Lee's approval rating plunges to 17%. Retrieved December 12, 2009, from KBS News: http://english.kbs.co.kr/news/newsview_sub.php?menu=2&key=2008060407

Kim, H. S. (2009, September 25). Suit against Park Won-soon. Retrieved October 15, 2009, from The Korea Times: http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/opinon/2009/10/169_52504.html

Kim, S. H. (2000). The politics of democratization in Korea: The role of civil society. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.

Kim, S. J. (2002). The genealogy of Confucian moralpolitik and its implications for modern civil society. In C. K. Armstrong, Korean society: Civil society, democracy, and the state (pp. 57-91). New York: Routledge.

Kim, Y. T. (2009, October 1). The Democratic Party’s indifference. Retrieved October 17, 2009, from The Hankyoreh: http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_opinion/379756.html

Klingner, B. (2007, December 20). Conservative landslide marks new era in South Korea. Retrieved December 12, 2009, from The Heritage Foundation: http://www.heritage.org/research/AsiaandthePacific/wm1758.cfm

Lee Myung-bak: Profile. (2009). Retrieved December 14, 2009, from Choeng-wa-dae / Office of the President: http://www.president.go.kr/kr/president/president/profile.php

Lee, J. H. (2009, December 10). Mi-so-jae-dan: Shin-bok-wi eop-mu-hyup-yak-shik gae-chwei / Cooperation agreement established between Smile Microcredit Bank and Credit Counseling & Recovery Service. Retrieved December 12, 2009, from Asia Business: http://www.ajnews.co.kr/uhtml/read.jsp?idxno=200912101316001920445

Lee, S. Y. (2009, October 2). Microfinance raises both hopes, doubts. Retrieved October 15, 2009, from The Korea Herald: http://www.koreaherald.co.kr/NEWKHSITE/data/html_dir/2009/10/02/200910020037.asp

Logarta, L. T. (2009, July 20). Park Won Soon: The people's servant as visionary. Retrieved December 14, 2009, from Wonsoon.com: http://wonsoon.com/tag/5384

Na, J. J. (2009, September 7). President denies allegations of media control. Retrieved December 12, 2009, from The Korea Times: http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2009/10/116_51441.html

Noh, H. W. (2009, December 3). 'Guk-ka-ga jung-bu-bi-pan gae-in-ae so-song' jeok-kyeok-sung jaeng-jeom / 'Suing the indiivudal for criticism of the state' - A contentious issue. Retrieved December 11, 2009, from The Hankyoreh: http://www.hani.co.kr/arti/society/society_general/391340.html

OECD. (2009). Society at a glance 2009: OECD social indicators. Retrieved December 13, 2009, from Organisation for economic co-operation and development: http://titania.sourceoecd.org/vl=4924144/cl=14/nw=1/rpsv/societyataglance2009/08/04/index.htm

Park, W. S. (2009, September 17). Jin-sil-eun i-reu-sim-ni-da / The truth is like this. Retrieved December 3, 2009, from Wonsoon.com: Social designer's blog: http://wonsoon.com/803

PSPD. (2008, May 19). About PSPD. Retrieved 11 9, 2009, from People's Solidarity for Participatory Democracy: http://blog.peoplepower21.org/English

The Hankyoreh. (2009, October 6). Park is unwavering in criticism against NIS for spying on civilians. Retrieved October 15, 2009, from The Hankyoreh: http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_national/380375.html

Walsh, B. (2006, May 8). Saving Seoul. Retrieved December 14, 2009, from Time Asia: http://www.time.com/time/asia/covers/501060515/story.html

Yonhap. (2009, October 5). Park Won-Soon: 'dae-tong-ryeong in-ki, ya-dang-do won-in' / Park Won-Soon: 'Caused by president popularity and opposition'. Retrieved October 15, 2009, from Donga News: http://www.donga.com/fbin/output?n=200910050272

Yonhap. (2008, November 4). 'Nyoo-ra-i-teh-chun-guk-yon-hap' Kim Jin-Hong sang-im-eui-jang, CBS-R in-teo-byoo jun-moon / Interview with New Right's Jin-Hong Kim. Retrieved December 14, 2009, from Naver News: http://news.naver.com/main/read.nhn?mode=LSD&mid=sec&sid1=001&oid=098&aid=0002005057&

크리에이티브 커먼즈 라이선스

이 저작물은 크리에이티브 커먼즈 코리아 저작자표시-비영리-동일조건변경허락 2.0 대한민국 라이선스에 따라 이용하실 수 있습니다.

한국의 인권시계? - AHRC의 긴급호소문

희망둥이 re-hope — Sat, 02 Jan 2010 21:34:20 +0900

얼마전 아시아인권위원회 The Asian Human Rights Commission(AHRC)가 저에 대해 다음과 같은 긴급호소문 Urgent Appeal 을 냈다는 사실을 알았습니다. 국정원이 제기한 소송이 부당하다는 판단아래 그 소송을 당장 취하할 것을 요구하는 내용이었습니다. 저도 인권운동가였고 국제적인 인권활동을 많이 했지만 제가 이렇게 긴급호소의 당사자가 되리라고는 꿈도 꾸지 못했습니다. 지난 80년대 90년대 그 엄혹한 독재치하에서 저도 인권운동을 하고, 인권변론을 했지만 그 독재정권도 저희들 건드리지는 못했습니다. 참으로 창피한 노릇입니다. 대한민국의 인권시계는 지금 몇시를 가르치고 있나요?

다음은 AHRC가 낸 긴급호소문의 전문입니다

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information that on September 14, 2009 the National Intelligence Service (NIS) sued Mr. Park Won-Soon, a human rights lawyer and civil activist, for civil defamation requesting a huge amount of money in damages. The AHRC is concerned that defamation will be used by public authorities against activists in future to discourage criticism leaving the door open for the illegal activities of government institutions without proper investigations, which in turn will eventually result in restricting freedom of opinion and expression.

CASE DETAILS:

Mr. Park Won-Soon, a human rights lawyer and civil activist has been working for a non-government organisation (NGO) recognised as a social enterprise by the government in 2007. He was awarded the Magsaysay Award for public work in the Philippines in 2006. He is currently an executive director of a NGO called, "The Hope Institute".

According to the information received, Mr. Park alleged that the National Intelligence Service (NIS) had carried out surveillance and inspections in violation of the National Intelligence Service Act while Mr. Park was doing interview with a weekly magazine, Weekly Kyunghyang on June 10 2009.

The NIS, in response to Mr. Park's comments made during this interview, sued him for civil defamation on September 14. In the statement, the NIS stated, "(the) NIS has been accused of carrying out inspections which is an abuse of its authority due to Mr. Park's false remarks". The NIS claimed that he must pay KRW 200 million (around USD 170,000) in damages.

However, there has been no investigation into these allegations raised by Mr. Park but instead he now faces a defamation suit by the NIS.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:

After the case was filed, Mr. Park held a press conference on September 17 and provided details of the allegations of the illegal operation by the NIS. They are as follows:

1. Local public relations centre: The Ministry of Public Administration and Security and the Hope Institute were under a three years bona fide contract, however, the agreement was terminated in a year due to budget cuts. At the meeting of the board members held after the termination of the contract, upon closer examination of the termination of the contract and approved budget plans, the amount assigned for the following year appeared to be greater than the amount for the current year. After attempting to find out through various channels, including attempting to ask the director and vice-minister of the Ministry of Public Administration and Security, and even the secretarial office of Cheongwadae (the Korean presidential residence) as to why such was the case, the response received was that due to the fact that the decision was made at senior levels, they were not aware of the details.

2. Hana Hope Foundation: The government (The Ministry of Strategy and Finance & the Financial Services Commission) and Hana Bank were, with the cooperation of the Hope Institute in the midst of preparing funding support for small sized companies, and Hana Bank decided to fold the business of the Hope Institute. A few days later, it was announced that this business would be operated with Donga-Ilbo, a newspaper. Around two months later, senior officers from Hana Bank claimed that NIS officers started to intervene, and cooperation with the Hope Institute officers broke down. Mr. Park also heard this news via alternate avenues, and it became known that the NIS had indeed played a significant role in the intervention.

3. Details of the investigative inspection concerning Mr. Park and his associates:

a) One director of a foundation reportedly told Mr. Park that "investigators from the NIS were relentlessly questioning him for detailed information."

b) Mr. Park heard from a person associated with a foundation that the NIS contacted the foundation registered under his name and asked about his salary, his role etc. at the organisation.

c) The NIS officers enquired into the activities of Mr. Park outside the scope of his official work.

4. A series of illegal inquiries by the NIS about Beautiful Store which is a social enterprise working for vulnerable groups that Mr. Park used to work with:

1) A branch of Beautiful Coffee Shop at a University: On April 2009, two days after the opening of the coffee shop at the University, NIS officers came to the general office of the University and asked as to why the university was supporting Beautiful Store. In particular, they inquired more about why the university supported the Beautiful Store providing money to a leftist group and whose staff were former student activists.

2) A bank supporting the Beautiful Store as a social activity: During June of 2009, an individual claiming to be part of the NIS contacted a representative at the Bank and asked "what kind of relations do you share with Beautiful Store for you to provide such a hefty sum of money over a long period of time?"

3) Mutual event in Gyeonggi province for lifetime educational centre: In May 2009, a spectator at a charity event meeting claimed that he "received a call from the NIS, and asked to refrain from proceeding with Beautiful Store's festivals."

In addition, Mr. Pak also alleged that progressive organisations were taken off the government's list of supported organisations, and the NIS pressurised senior executives of a company to withdraw membership from it and further demanded key public institutions not to engage in work with lawyers from MINBYUN-Lawyers for a Democratic Society. With these examples, he further alleged that the NIS has systematically been involved in carrying out inspections.

SUGGESTED ACTION:

Please send a letter to the government authorities listed below, asking them to ensure the withdrawal of legal action against Mr. Park and for an investigation into the allegations of illegal activities of the NIS.

Please be informed that the AHRC has also sent a letter to the UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of opinion and expression calling for intervention in this matter.

To support this appeal, please click here:

SAMPLE LETTER:

Dear _________,

SOUTH KOREA: Please immediately drop defamation case against Mr. Park Won-Soon and investigate the allegations of illegal activities of the NIS

Name of accused: Mr. Park Won-Soon (54 years old), a lawyer, executive director of a permanent committee of the Hope Institute, non-governmental organisation
Plaintiff: Republic of Korea by way of National Intelligence Service (NIS)
Date & Case: 12 September, 2009; civil defamation

I am shocked to hear that the National Intelligence Service (NIS) on behalf of the Government of the Republic of Korea has sued Mr. Park Won-Soon for civil defamation on 12 September 2009 based on the remarks he made during an interview in a weekly magazine.

According to the information received, during the interview, Mr. Park alleged some examples of the NIS conducting inspections of private personnel and organisations in violation of the NIS Act. After the defamation case was filed, he held a press conference and offered more examples how systematically the NIS has been involved in illegal activities.

With regards to Mr. Park's case, I strongly oppose the defamation case against any citizen in the territory by any government institution. Whereas it is the first case ever that a government institution has sued an individual for defamation in the Republic of Korea, a question still remains as to whether the government can be a plaintiff as a legal subject in this case. I would like to draw your attention to the fact that the Commission on Human Rights, the former Human Rights Council as well as Human Rights Committee and special procedures have already called for the abolition of the offence of "defamation of the State" since 1999. A number of courts such as, in India, South Africa, the United Kingdom, the United States and Zimbabwe have also refused to allow public authorities to sue for defamation. Defamation lawsuits have been used in countries with bad human rights records.

The allegations raised by Mr. Park include the termination after a year of three-year bona fide contract with the Ministry of Public Administration and Security due to a decision made by a higher authority; NIS's illegal intervention to pressurise a bank to stop a project that was supposed to work with the Hope Institute; NIS's illegal inquiry about him through his associates such as his salary, his role and other activities; NIS's illegal investigation into a university supporting 'Beautiful Store' that Mr. Park used to work with; NIS's illegal inquiry about a relationship between a banker having supported and Mr. Park; NIS's illegal pressure on an organiser of a charity event to refrain from proceeding with Beautiful Store's festivals; NIS's illegal pressure on a senior executives of a company to withdraw membership from Mr. Park's organisation, and; NIS's illegal pressure on key public institutions not to engage in work with lawyers from MINBYUN-Lawyers for a Democratic Society.

I urge you to immediately investigate allegations that the NIS agents have indeed inspected him and his friends in violation of article 3 of the National Intelligence Service Act.

I also urge you to immediately drop the defamation case against Mr. Park and investigate as to whether the agents of the NIS have acted illegally so that those involved are properly prosecuted and punished in accordance with law. If the case goes on, it will only demonstrate to the international community that the limitation of the freedom of opinion and expression in South Korea is getting worse, and how the existing law has been arbitrarily used to attack individuals and organizations despite the fact that the law and order has been reemphasized by the President himself.

I further take this opportunity to remind you of the need for a thorough and impartial investigation into the allegations of illegal inspection and surveillance by several information agencies including the NIS and Defense Security Command, which have reportedly increased.

Yours sincerely,

----
PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTERS TO:

1. Mr. Lee Myeng-Bak
President
1 Sejong-no, Jongno-gu
Seoul, 110-820
REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Fax: +82 2 770 4751
Tel: +82 2 770 0018
E-mail: foreign@president.go.kr or president@cwd.go.kr or president@president.go.kr

2. Mr. Lee Gui-nam
Minister of Justice
88 Gwanmon-ro, Gwachon-si
Gyonggi Province 427-760
REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Tel: +82 2 503 7023
Fax: +82 2 2110 3079 / 503 7046
E-mail: webmaster@moj.go.kr

3. Mr. Kim Joon-gyu
Prosecutor General
Supreme Prosecutor's Office
1730-1, Seocho3-dong
Seocho-gu, Seoul
REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Fax: +82 2 3480 2555
Tel: +82 2 3480 2000

Thank you.

Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (ua@ahrc.asia)

Posted on 2009-10-09

Back to [2009 Urgent Appeals]

크리에이티브 커먼즈 라이선스

이 저작물은 크리에이티브 커먼즈 코리아 저작자표시-비영리-동일조건변경허락 2.0 대한민국 라이선스에 따라 이용하실 수 있습니다.

이명박 대통령님 덕에 상 받았으니 좋은 곳에 전해드립니다.

희망둥이 re-hope — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 14:41:14 +0900

윗목 아니죠.

아랫목 아니죠.

원순씨가 좋아하는 자리는?

말석입니다.

한 가운데 자리, 남에게 스폿라이트를 받고, 칭찬을 받는 자리는

체질적으로 부끄러워하는 원순씨.

그래서 이번 제15회 불교인권상 수상자로 선정되었을 때도

할 수만 있다면 상을 받고 싶지 않다고 했습니다.

특히나 올해는 MB정부 하의 여러 상황과 조건 때문에

자신보다 더 낮은 곳에서 인권과 민주주의를 위해

노고를 아끼지 않은 많은 분들이 많이 계신데

자신이 어찌 이 상을 받을 수 있는지 매우 부끄러워 했습니다.

아래는 불교인권상 선정 사유를 발췌한 글입니다.

"먼저 박원순 희망제작소 상임이사께서는

첫째, 암울했던 지난 시절 민변활동과 시민사회운동을 하면서 민주화와 인권신장에 기여하였습니다.

둘째, 시민운동을 통하여 우리나라의 국가기관이나 기업이 민주적 절차에 따라 투명하게 운영되도록 많은

노력을 하여 제도적으로 자리 잡는데 일조하였습니다.

셋째, 최근에는 우리나라의 기부문화정착에 기여하는데 앞장서서 활동했다는 것은 모두가 아는 일입니다.

이 기부확산운동이 바로 부처님의 가르침인 보시행을 하는 것입니다.

또한 최근에는 권력기관의 음흉한 술수와 간섭을 공개적으로 과감히 거부하여

모든 사람들에게 정권에서 공권력의 비열함을 널리 알린 점이 이 상을 받게 된 이유입니다."

알고 보니 국가가 원순씨에게 고소를 하게 되어 결과적으로 귀한 상을 받게 되었네요.

그렇다면 도의상 상금의 반은 MB에게?

용산참사 300일이 넘었습니다.

지금 우리는'용산'을 떠나 인권과 민주주의를 말할 수 없는 시대가 되어 버렸습니다.

그래서 원순씨는 어제 용산참사범대위가 머물고 있는 명동성당에 가서 그분들에게 이 상금 전액을

전달하였습니다.

돈이 아니라.

위로와 격려, 그리고 끈끈한 연대의 정신을 보내 드렸습니다.

용산문제는 정부의 시혜가 아니라 시민의 관심과 참여 속에서

그 해법이 찾아지는 것 아닐까 합니다.

크리에이티브 커먼즈 라이선스

이 저작물은 크리에이티브 커먼즈 코리아 저작자표시-비영리-동일조건변경허락 2.0 대한민국 라이선스에 따라 이용하실 수 있습니다.

오늘도 저는 채찍을 맞습니다. - 불교인권상 수상 소감문

희망둥이 re-hope — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 14:25:25 +0900

며칠전 느닷없이 불교인권위원회에서 불교인권상을 수여하기로 결정하였다는 연락이 왔습니다. 상이라는 것이 영광이기는 하지만 늘 부끄러움을 주는 것이기도 합니다. 거부하는 것이 그 분들에게 죄송한 것이어서 그렇게까지는 못했습니다. 그날 이미 일정이 있어 참석하지는 못했구요. 그대신 수상소감문만 써 보냈습니다. 불교인권위원회 간사가 읽고 폭소를 터뜨렸다는군요. 이 상의 상금 200만원은 오늘 밤 명동성당에 있는 용산참사범대위 사람들에게 전달했습니다. 좀 더 보태서 더 큰 돈을 전달해드리지 못한 것이 조금은 가슴 아팠습니다. 이 겨울 그 가족들이 좀 더 용기와 희망을 가지시기를 바라며.

수난받는 사람들과 함께 해 행복합니다

- 이명박 대통령님, 너무 너무 감사드립니다

1. 참 부끄럽습니다

또 부끄러운 일이 벌어졌습니다. 자꾸 좋은 상이란 상을 다 받으니 참 창피한 노릇이지요. 진실로 우리 시대에 수난을 당하는 사람이 얼마나 많은데 제가 상을 다 받습니까? 그 수난받는 사람들과 함께 하는 수많은 변호사와 종교인과 시민들이 있는데 저에게 인권상이라니요?

참 죄송합니다. 제가 한 일이 없는데요. 온 세상의 변화와 희망을 위해 뛰고는 있지만 욕심은 많고 성취는 적습니다. 늘 자신에게 불만입니다. 자신도 만족시키지 못하는 활동을 한 사람에게 그 귀한 불교인권상이라니요? 오늘 이 어색한 자리에 불가피하게 못가게 된 것을 참으로 다행스럽게 생각합니다.

2.저는 국가와 동격이 되었습니다

제가 한 게 무엇입니까? 제가 무얼 잘했다고 상을 주신단 말입니까? 제가 최근에 인권을 위해 한 일이란 그냥 국정원에서 소송당한 것 뿐입니다. 국정원이 저를 국가의 이름으로 소송을 건 것인데요. 저가 국가의 피고가 됨으로써 제가 국가의 입장과 동격이 된 것이지요. 이런 영광스런 일에 무슨 격려와 위로가 있을 수 있나요? 오히려 저는 이번 소송을 통해서 엄청 득을 보았습니다.

지나가는 사람들이 저에게 달려와서 싸인을 받아갑니다. “혼자가 아니니 힘내라”는 이야기를 수없이 듣고 있습니다. 택시기사 아저씨가 차비를 받지 않겠다고 하여 참 당혹스럽습니다. 회원이 답지합니다. 이렇게 덕을 본 주제에 무슨 상이라니요?

3.수난받는 사람들과 함께 해 고맙습니다.

30년도 더 된 옛날에 제가 19살 미성년자로서 감옥에 갔습니다. 서울대학교 재학중 교내 시위에 잠깐 참가한 것 때문에 영등포구치소로 잡혀가고 학교는 그날부로 짤렸지요. 그 이후 저는 늘 가난하고 힘들고 억울한 사람들 곁에 있을 수 있었습니다. 그래서 저는 늘 박정희대통령께 감사합니다. 제가 만약 그 시대에 감옥을 가지 않았다면 고시공부-검사-공안검사로의 출세의 길을 달렸을지 모릅니다.

그러나 얼마나 다행입니까? 박정희대통령 때문에 저는 감옥을 갈 수 있었고 이렇게 가난한 이, 힘없고 빽없는 사람들, 억울하고 절망하는 사람들의 친구가 되고 동반자가 될 수 있었지 않습니까?

꼭같이 이명박 대통령님., 참 감사합니다. 저가 혼자 잘먹고 잘살고, 저가 하는 일이 순조롭지 않게 만들어주셔서 참 감사합니다. 저에게 좌절과 쓰디쓴 실패의 경험을 안겨주셔서 감사드립니다. 더 노력하고 더 튼튼하고 더 바닥에서 가는 사람으로 만들어주셔서 너무 감사드립니다. 수난받는 사람들과 함께 하게 해 주셔서 감사합니다.

4. 저는 오늘도 채찍을 맞습니다

늘 그렇듯이 상은 채찍입니다. 더 잘하라고 주는 매입니다. 안주하고 즐거워할 수가 없습니다. 결코 행복할 수가 없는 것입니다. 상이 주는 의미는 바로 여기에 있습니다.

저와 동시에 최상재 대표가 수상했습니다. 나는 그와 비교가 안됩니다. 그는 언론억압의 광풍이 몰아닥치는 허허벌판에서 온 몸으로 그 비와 바람을 막으며 서 있는 사람입니다. 며칠전 프레스센터 앞에서 천막농성을 친 그를 보았습니다. 참으로 부끄러움을 느낍니다.

이 상으로 말미암아 해이해지는 자신을 좀 더 채찍질하겠습니다. 조금은 더 인간적이고 민주적인 사회를 위하여, 조금은 더 상식이 통하고 희망이 생길 수 있도록, 작은 힘, 작은 땅방울, 작은 노력을 바치겠습니다. 의문의 여지없이 그 길을 달려가겠습니다. 감사합니다.

크리에이티브 커먼즈 라이선스

이 저작물은 크리에이티브 커먼즈 코리아 저작자표시-비영리-동일조건변경허락 2.0 대한민국 라이선스에 따라 이용하실 수 있습니다.

국정원과 맞서는 세 명의 변호사

희망둥이 re-hope — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 09:33:36 +0900

며칠 전 제 담당변호사를 만났습니다.

웬 담당변호사냐구요?

글쎄 말입니다. 제가 변호사인데 다른 변호사의 도움을 받게 되었지 뭡니까?

바로 지난달 국정원이 대한민국 이름으로 저를 제소했기 때문이지요

처음에는 대규모변호인단을 구성할까 고민도 했지요.

그런데 저로서야 많은 분들이 변론에 나서 주신다면 큰 도움이 되기야 하겠지요

그렇지만 그 분들에게는 또한 폐를 끼치는 것이지요.

국정원과 싸우는 소송에 변호인으로 나서는 것이 조금은 폐가 되지 않겠어요?

그래서 그 사건을 적극 나서서 변론해 주시겠다는 차병직 변호사님과 그의 두분의 후배변호사 박주민변호사와 윤지영변호사님 세분께 맡겼답니다. 차변호사님은 늘 선한 얼굴을 하고 다니는 참 변호사답지 않은 변호사이신데 저와는 아주 오래전부터 알고 지내는 사이이지요. 아니 조금의 돈만 생기면 여행을 떠나기 일쑤인데요. 그래서 여행기를 몇권의 책으로 펴낸 로맨티스트이기도 하답니다.

(식당에서 찍은 세 분 변호사님들의 사진. 맨 왼쪽이 차병직, 가우데가 박주민변호사, 오른쪽이 윤지영 변호사님입니다)

박주민변호사님은 명예훼손이나 불법행위 등에 귀한 논문들도 쓰고 유사한 사건을 많이 맡은 젊은 변호사이시고 윤지영변호사님 역시 아직 젊지만 패기와 열정이 느껴지는 분이었어요. 이 세분이 변론을 맡았으니 이제 저는 발뻗고 자도 될 것 같습니다.

돈 한푼 안드렸는데도 선뜻 제 사건을 맡아 주셨으니 참 고마운 노릇이지요

제가 쓴 책을 한 권씩 서명해 드렸더니 영광이라고 하시니 참 몸둘 바를 더욱 몰랐답니다.

세상에는 이런 의인 변호사님들도 계시니 아직 희망이 있는 것이겠지요?

크리에이티브 커먼즈 라이선스

이 저작물은 크리에이티브 커먼즈 코리아 저작자표시-비영리-동일조건변경허락 2.0 대한민국 라이선스에 따라 이용하실 수 있습니다.