Human Rights Violation Under the Guise of Religion: Over 2,000 Cases of Coerced Conversion in South Korea

Article 20, Paragraph 1 of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea explicitly guarantees freedom of religion to all citizens. The choice to adopt, maintain, or abandon a belief is a fundamental personal liberty. However, alarming statistical evidence indicates that this constitutional guarantee is being undermined by severe human rights violations occurring behind closed doors, often hidden under the label of "family disputes" or "cult counseling."

According to recent investigative reports by local media and data compiled by the Global Alliance for Religious Freedom and Human Rights, approximately 2,000 individuals belonging to Shincheonji Church of Jesus have faced illegal coerced conversion attempts over the past two decades.

This issue extends far beyond theological debate—it represents a grave violation of universal human rights and statutory law.

Escalating Violence and Vulnerable Targets

The methods reported in these coerced conversion cases go well beyond verbal persuasion or theological intervention. Cumulative data from 2003 through recent years reveals a disturbing pattern of physical and psychological abuse:

• Physical Restraint and Abduction: Over 1,200 documented cases of unlawful confinement and nearly 1,000 instances of abduction.

• Assault and Coercion: Hundreds of reported cases involving physical assault, forced leave from school or employment, and forced psychiatric institutionalization.

• Fatalities: Tragically, at least five deaths have been linked to these forced conversion processes over the years, including the high-profile case of the late Ji-in Gu in 2018.

The data indicates that these actions systematically target socio-economically vulnerable demographics. Approximately 74% of all victims are female, with young adults in their 20s and 30s accounting for 85% of total cases.

During peak crisis periods, such as the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, reported incidents spiked by more than 50% in a single year, demonstrating how heightened social hostility can trigger targeted private sanctions against individuals.

Recent Incidents and the Pattern of Daily Control

Far from being a relic of the past, reports indicate that these practices persist today. Documented cases from recent years describe individuals being tracked via surveillance, forcibly relocated, deprived of mobile communication, and subjected to continuous financial and physical pressure by family members acting under external influence.

While critical public sentiment toward non-traditional religious groups remains strong in South Korea, legal and constitutional experts emphasize that public criticism or theological disagreement cannot justify criminal acts.

"Disliking a specific religion is entirely different from committing a crime against its members," noted Prof. Sang-kyum Kim, a constitutional law expert at Dongguk University. "Forcible means such as confinement, abduction, or assault constitute distinct criminal offenses under the Penal Code, regardless of religious context."

Prof. Kim further emphasized that external figures who direct or incite families to engage in illegal confinement or coercion can be held criminally liable as accomplices, stressing the necessity for neutral and strict law enforcement.

Moving Toward Structural Accountability and Legal Protection

The persistence of these incidents highlights a critical gap in legal and institutional safeguards. When law enforcement agencies categorize unlawful confinement or assault as a "private family matter," it leaves victims without immediate state protection, violating the state's duty to protect fundamental human rights.

True religious freedom requires protecting the rights of all individuals, including those holding minority or controversial beliefs. Addressing coerced conversion requires clear regulatory measures, objective criminal investigations, and an unwavering commitment to rule of law over social prejudice.

What steps do you think international civil society and legal institutions should take to address fundamental human rights violations occurring under the pretext of religious counseling?

Source: https://vo.la/jDVmeP0