SEOUL, March 11 (Yonhap) The unification ministry on Thursday said it will continue to maintain close communication with the international community on a recently legislated ban on sending anti-Pyongyang leaflets into North Korea after a U.N special rapporteur voiced concerns over South Korea's decision, an official said. Earlier, Special Rapporteur Tomas Ojea Quintana submitted a report to the U.N. Human Rights Council (UNHRC), expressing.
February 15, 2021
Regarding the Interpretation Guidelines of the Amendments of the Development of Inter-Korean Relations Act
We are writing in response to your call for comments regarding the Interpretation Guidelines for the Scope of Application of Article 24(1)3 of the Development of Inter-Korean Relations Act.[1]
The Amendment to the Development of Inter-Korean Relations Act (the “Act”) imposes strict limitations to some activities of North Korean escapee and civil society organizations that aim to send and receive information and ideas to people in North Korea. Most of these restricted activities are protected by the freedom of expression recognized in article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which South Korea ratified in 1990.[2]
How Residents on the DMZ See South Korea s Anti-Leaflet Bill nationalinterest.org - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from nationalinterest.org Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
Posted : 2021-01-19 16:45 By Kim Joon-hyung
Controversy seems to be growing over the amendment to the Development of Inter-Korean Relations Act aimed at imposing a ban on floating anti-North Korea leaflets across the border since its unilateral passage by the National Assembly last December.
Valid criticism and constructive debate for the resolution of issues are always welcome in the Republic of Korea, a democratic country. However, distortions disguised as such and entrapping them in a malicious frame should be firmly rejected.
The argument that the amended act limits freedom of expression, a basic principle of democracy, and is advantageous to North Korea is an example of malicious framing. Such groundless distortions abound in both South Korea and the United States.