NHRC to Include December 3 Martial Law Human Rights Abuses in 2025 Report Amid Internal Debate

The Hankyoreh reports on a significant decision by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) of South Korea to address the human rights violations that occurred following the December 3 emergency martial law. This move, while seemingly straightforward, is fraught with internal debate and external criticism, reflecting the complex and often contentious nature of historical reckoning in South Korea.

“

The role of state institutions and national human rights bodies during the emergency martial law must be included.

The NHRC's decision to document these events in its 2025 report is a step towards acknowledging past injustices. However, the article highlights the deep divisions among the commissioners themselves. Some, like Standing Commissioner Lee Sook-jin, emphasize the need to accurately detail the role of state institutions, including the NHRC, during the martial law period. Others, like Commissioner Oh Wan-ho, argue for a clear interpretation from a human rights perspective to guide future generations.

“

Clearly interpreting it from a human rights perspective, even if it was a short period, provides advice for future generations.

Conversely, Standing Commissioner Kim Hak-ja expresses reservations, questioning whether the alleged rights violations were actualized or merely potential, given the short duration of the martial law. Her concerns point to a broader debate about how to assess historical events and the threshold for recognizing human rights abuses. The controversy is further fueled by the NHRC's previous actions, including the dismissal of a direct investigation into the December 3 martial law and the controversial recommendation regarding the defense rights of former President Yoon Suk-yeol. These past decisions have led to accusations that the NHRC has been complicit or has failed to uphold its independence.

“

The human rights violations that are expected due to actions that did not actually proceed can be acknowledged, but we must consider whether fundamental rights were actually violated.

From our perspective at The Hankyoreh, this decision is crucial but also underscores the ongoing struggle for genuine accountability. The NHRC's internal disagreements and the lingering questions about its past conduct mean that the inclusion of these events in the report will be closely scrutinized. The public, as voiced by the National Union of Government Employees' NHRC branch, questions whether the NHRC can truly present an objective account given its prior actions. The NHRC's ability to provide a comprehensive and unbiased report will be a test of its commitment to its mandate and its role in South Korea's democratic society.

“

Is there any citizen who would accept this draft report, written as if nothing happened, despite the NHRC citing 'independence' to approve and resolve an agenda that supported the rebellion during an unconstitutional and illegal emergency martial law?