Visually Impaired Man Files Rights Complaint Over Alleged Police Mishandling of Guesthouse Incident

A visually impaired teacher, Jeong Han-ul, has taken his case to the National Human Rights Commission, accusing the Jeju Seobu Police Station of inadequate investigation and human rights violations. Mr. Jeong claims that the police failed to properly address his complaint against a guesthouse owner who allegedly threatened him and threw objects at him, including beer cans.

“

I hope that no disabled person will ever be treated as an 'invisible being' by investigative agencies again. I ask the Human Rights Commission to be the starting point for correcting this structural violation.

According to Mr. Jeong, the incident occurred last November when he inquired about bringing his guide dog to the guesthouse. After a verbal dispute, the guesthouse owner allegedly threw two empty beer cans and shouted at him. While the owner was investigated for insult and violation of the Act on Prohibition of Discrimination Against Persons with Disabilities, the police dismissed the case in February due to insufficient evidence. An appeal to the prosecution was also rejected last month.

“

Visually impaired people are very sensitive to auditory stimuli, and the fear that comes from not being able to see can be much greater. The investigative agencies judged the case based on the perpetrator's statement that the cans were thrown in the opposite direction and that it was out of anger, which is a typical discriminatory investigation that excludes the perceived fear and danger of the disabled person and interprets the case only from the perspective of the non-disabled.

Mr. Jeong argues that the police investigation was fundamentally flawed because it did not consider his specific circumstances as a visually impaired individual. He stated that the police relied heavily on the perpetrator's account, which described the cans being thrown in the opposite direction and as a heat-of-the-moment reaction. Mr. Jeong contends that this approach, which he calls "discriminatory investigation," completely disregarded the heightened fear and vulnerability experienced by someone who cannot see.

“

The Jeju Seobu Police Station did not provide the original CCTV footage, which is the core evidence of the case, and I only received a captured image that I could not verify.

Furthermore, Mr. Jeong highlighted that the police failed to provide him with the original CCTV footage of the incident, offering only a captured image instead. He asserts that the police have a duty to provide evidence in a manner accessible to individuals with disabilities, and denying him the opportunity to view the raw footage was a violation of this principle. The Jeju Seobu Police Station, however, maintained that the investigation followed proper procedures and that they had offered to let Mr. Jeong view the full CCTV footage if he had requested it. This stark contrast in perspectives underscores the challenges faced by disabled individuals when interacting with law enforcement and the justice system, particularly in ensuring that investigations are conducted with appropriate sensitivity and accommodation.

“

We cannot provide the entire CCTV footage (to the victim). We said 'if you want to view it, we will let you view it,' but you did not apply for viewing.