The Guri-Namyangju Branch of the Shincheonji Volunteer Group, led by Branch Manager Kang Chang-hoon, carried out a special volunteer service on 7th August to support local veterans during the ongoing heatwave and help them stay healthy throughout the summer.

The initiative was organised to provide practical assistance to elderly recipients of national merit who may be particularly vulnerable to extreme heat and heat-related illnesses. It also served as an expression of appreciation for veterans and national merit recipients who devoted themselves to serving and protecting their country.

Thirteen volunteers from the Guri-Namyangju Branch took part in the activity. They visited the Namyangju Branch of the Korea Association of Disabled Veterans and the Namyangju Branch of the Korea Association of Meritorious Service Medal Recipients.

The volunteers delivered 13 servings of nutritious samgyetang (ginseng chicken soup) prepared with pure lacquer tree extract, along with 13 boxes of seasonal watermelons. They also presented four framed Mugunghwa (Hibiscus) artworks handcrafted by the volunteers as a gesture of respect and gratitude for the recipients’ dedication and service.

In addition to providing nutritious meals and fresh fruit, the volunteers spent time with the veterans, sharing refreshments and offering information on preventing heat-related illnesses and maintaining good health during the summer months.

Kim Jeong-gon, chairman of the Namyangju Branch of the Association of Disabled Veterans, expressed his appreciation for the volunteers’ efforts.

“I am truly grateful for the thoughtful preparation of samgyetang for our members who live alone during this sweltering weather,” Kim said. “I hope this opportunity will help strengthen the relationship and cooperation between our two organisations.”

Kim Jong-wook, secretary general of the Namyangju Branch of the Association of Meritorious Service Medal Recipients, also thanked the volunteers for following through on their commitment.

“I deeply appreciate that you remembered your promise to return and volunteer after your previous visit,” Kim said. “I am grateful to the volunteer group for continuing to contribute so much to the local community.”

An official from the Guri-Namyangju Branch said the service was particularly meaningful given the current international climate.

“It is meaningful to have the opportunity, even in a small way, to express our gratitude to the veterans who helped lay the foundation for the peace we enjoy today, especially at a time when the international situation remains uncertain,” the official said.

The official added that the volunteer group's leadership has a strong commitment to honouring veterans, noting that its representative leader is also a Korean War veteran who has consistently emphasised the importance of respect and appreciation for those who served.

“We will continue working closely with local veterans’ organizations and remain committed to sincere volunteer service and sharing within the community,” the official said.

Source: vo.la/Mpx4d4t

The Shincheonji Volunteer Group is continuing efforts to support the revitalisation of traditional markets and neighbourhood commercial districts through activities designed around the characteristics and needs of individual communities. Its initiatives combine environmental cleanup, local events, and direct patronage of neighbourhood businesses to encourage greater activity in local commercial areas.

While online shopping continues to grow, traditional markets face the ongoing challenge of attracting visitors outside peak tourist periods and major holidays. Population decline in many regions has added to the difficulties faced by local merchants, increasing the importance of initiatives that encourage residents to visit and support neighbourhood businesses.

The Donghae Branch of the Shincheonji Volunteer Group entered into an agreement with the Merchants Association of Donghae City’s East Sea Central Market and organised a variety of activities aimed at increasing foot traffic and encouraging market visits.

The programme included balloon-popping games, quizzes, a “regular restaurant” sticker campaign, store stickers and coupons, and random prize drawings. Customers who made purchases at participating market stores received coupons that could be exchanged for goods at the campaign booth.

The event also incorporated traditional Korean activities, including Tuho (arrow throwing), Jegichagi (traditional foot shuttlecock), Yutnori, rope twisting, traditional stick-balancing activities, and sharing sword bean tea.

Additional activities were designed to appeal to multiple generations and evoke memories of earlier times. These included balsam finger dyeing, rubber-shoe throwing games, and a “Bongsunga Academy” experience featuring school uniforms inspired by the 1970s and 1980s.

Park Hyun-ju, a citizen who attended the event, said, “I visited the market for the first time in a while after hearing about the event. The products were reasonably priced, which was great from a consumer’s perspective.”

“If campaigns like this are held regularly, I believe they could be beneficial to the local economy,” Park added.

The volunteer group is also conducting ongoing environmental cleanup activities around traditional markets.

Since 2023, the Seoul Dongdaemun Branch has organised weekly Sunday cleanups around Gyeongdong Market and Cheongnyangni Market. Over the past three years, 1826 volunteers have participated, collecting approximately 8927 litres of waste.

Park Hee-soon, a merchant who operates a business at Cheongnyangni Market, said the regular cleanup efforts had made a visible difference.

“As the area was cleaned every week, the market became noticeably cleaner, and merchants naturally began paying more attention to keeping the environment clean,” Park said.

In Geoje, volunteers also cleaned the area surrounding Okpo International Market, a destination visited by both local residents and tourists. Following the cleanup, volunteers supported merchants by purchasing food ingredients and household goods directly from market stores.

Merchant Kim Jeong-suk said, “I was grateful that they supported the merchants by shopping at the market after completing the volunteer work.”

“It seems that combining environmental cleanup with direct support for traditional markets has also helped the surrounding commercial district,” Kim added.

Other branches have focused on encouraging residents to combine healthy activities with support for local businesses.

The Iksan Branch organised an eight-day “Donghaeng 10,000 Steps Challenge,” which encouraged participants to walk 10,000 steps each day while supporting local businesses. More than 300 people participated.

Participants who reached their daily walking goal received coupons that could be used at participating neighbourhood businesses, including cafés.

The operator of L Cafe, one of the participating businesses, said, “It was encouraging to see participants consistently visiting the store throughout the campaign.”

“They also offered words of encouragement, which gave me a real sense of warmth and connection with the community,” the café operator added.

Participants also incorporated plogging into their walks, collecting approximately 3000 litres of litter. In this way, the programme combined support for local businesses with environmental stewardship.

An official from the Shincheonji Volunteer Group said the organisation's goal is to create activities that generate tangible benefits for local communities rather than simply organising one-time volunteer visits.

“Our goal was not simply for volunteers to visit an area and leave, but to encourage citizens to visit local markets, spend time there, and contribute to actual economic activity,” the official said.

The official added that the organisation plans to continue pursuing initiatives that connect volunteer service, environmental improvement, community participation, and local consumption as part of its broader commitment to mutual growth.

Source: vo.la/mjPxO7L

Article 11 of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea guarantees equality before the law, while Article 20 protects freedom of religion. These fundamental rights are not privileges reserved for groups that enjoy widespread social acceptance or for religions favoured by the majority. Rather, the true strength of the Constitution and the rule of law is demonstrated when those same protections are extended to minority groups that may face social criticism, hostility, or prejudice.

Against this backdrop, the appellate ruling issued on 12th August in the administrative lawsuit between Shincheonji Church of Jesus and Gwacheon City over a change in building use raises significant questions.

At its core is a fundamental issue: Can opposition to a particular religion justify restricting the constitutional rights of citizens who practise that religion?

The appellate court overturned the lower court's decision and ruled in favour of Gwacheon City. It determined that the city's acceptance of a 2006 report concerning the change of use did not constitute a valid permit under the revised Building Act and concluded that the building remained classified as a “business facility.”

The court also considered collective complaints, potential regional conflict, concerns regarding the residential and educational environment, and traffic and parking issues. Based on these factors, it concluded that there was a substantial public-interest justification for refusing the requested change.

However, whether resident opposition, social tensions, or the possibility of conflict can legitimately justify restrictions on fundamental rights—including religious freedom and property rights—is an issue that warrants particularly careful scrutiny.

The first-instance court reached a different conclusion. It held that restrictions on fundamental rights could not readily be justified by vague concerns, a large number of complaints, or negative perceptions surrounding a particular religion and its missionary activities. Instead, the court indicated that such restrictions should be supported by concrete and objectively verifiable risks.

The fact that two courts reached fundamentally different conclusions regarding the same building, the same surrounding circumstances, and the same application raises an important question: What changed sufficiently to justify such a dramatic reversal?

A significant departure from the original judgment requires a clear explanation capable of convincing the public that the legal and factual circumstances genuinely warranted a different outcome. Without such an explanation, concerns may arise that broader social sentiment or the prevailing political atmosphere influenced the legal assessment.

Another issue deserves attention.

Following the ruling, Gwacheon City reportedly characterised the outcome as “a result obtained through the united response of citizens, the city, and the council.”

But whose views does the city mean when it refers to the “will of the citizens”?

For some time, opposition to Shincheonji has been organised in Gwacheon, particularly among elements of the Protestant community. There have been instances in which the views of this opposition movement have been presented or perceived as though they represented the views of Gwacheon residents as a whole.

However, several local merchants have expressed a different perspective. They voiced dissatisfaction with efforts to prevent the facility from operating normally and said, in effect, that they hoped the Shincheonji Church would be allowed to resume normal operations so that the surrounding commercial district could once again be revitalised.

If different views exist within the community, Gwacheon City should consider whether it is misleading the public by presenting the position of one side as though it represents the entirety of public sentiment.

Administrative litigation is not an election in which the side with the greatest popular support wins. Its purpose is to determine whether an administrative action has a clear legal basis, whether a restriction on fundamental rights is genuinely necessary, and whether any such restriction has been limited to the minimum extent required.

If minority rights can be overridden simply because the majority voice is louder, the fundamental meaning of the rule of law is inevitably weakened.

The circumstances surrounding the case also raise a broader question.

Did religious hostility towards Shincheonji—particularly hostility arising from established denominations characterising the organization as a “heresy” or “cult”—become amplified through portions of the media? Did that public sentiment, in turn, influence Gwacheon City's response, eventually contributing to administrative and judicial restrictions affecting a particular religious group?

If hostility towards a religion ultimately develops into administrative sanctions, the consequences for the rule of law are deeply troubling.

The state is not a religious authority charged with determining which religion is right or wrong. Its responsibility is to remain neutral and protect the constitutional rights of all citizens equally, regardless of whether their religious beliefs are popular or belong to a minority.

The concept of “public interest” should not become a catch-all justification for restricting fundamental rights.

Where fundamental rights are limited on public-interest grounds, the risks relied upon to justify those restrictions should be demonstrated through concrete and objective evidence. If vague concerns, social discomfort, or collective opposition can simply be repackaged as “public interest,” the rule of law risks being transformed into what is effectively a tyranny of the majority.

This raises another legitimate question: If an established and widely accepted church had submitted the same application for the same building under the same circumstances, would Gwacheon City and the courts have applied precisely the same standards?

The credibility of the law is ultimately measured by whether it protects unpopular minorities with the same standards it applies to powerful or widely accepted groups.

Gwacheon City should therefore be cautious about presenting the views of one particular group as the collective voice of the community. Likewise, the constitutional rights of citizens should not be restricted simply because their religion is unpopular or viewed negatively by others.

If such a principle were accepted, the consequences would extend far beyond Shincheonji. At stake would be the constitutional guarantees of equality before the law, freedom of religion, and the rule of law itself.

Source: vo.la/Zwc2fEx

Former Finnish Supreme Court Justice Gustaf Möller emphasised that pretrial detention should be an exceptional measure—not the norm—in a democratic society governed by the rule of law. He said any decision to continue detention should be based on a careful, individualised assessment of specific risks, including flight, destruction of evidence, or the possibility of serious criminal activity.

Möller made the remarks in response to a recent inquiry concerning the detention of ManHee Lee, chairman of Shincheonji Church of Jesus.

According to Möller, in a democratic state governed by the rule of law, pretrial detention is an exception rather than a general principle. Referring to Article 9, Paragraph 3 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), he explained that a defendant awaiting trial should be detained only when doing so is reasonable and necessary to address specific risks, such as flight, destruction of evidence, or the recurrence of serious crimes.

“Pretrial detention should not become a form of punishment before a final conviction has been reached,” Möller said. He stressed that courts must provide concrete and sufficient reasons when ordering or extending detention.

“In order to continue pretrial detention, relevant and sufficient grounds must be presented,” he said. “It is not enough for a court to simply repeat abstract legal phrases.”

Möller further explained that detention decisions should reflect the individual circumstances of the defendant. Courts should also consider whether less restrictive alternatives could adequately address the identified risks.

Possible alternatives, he noted, may include bail, surrender of travel documents, restrictions on residence, mandatory periodic appearances before authorities, house arrest, electronic monitoring, and limitations on contact with witnesses.

He also identified age and health as important factors in assessing the necessity and proportionality of detention.

While advanced age does not automatically exempt a defendant from detention, Möller said that courts must give serious consideration to circumstances arising from a defendant’s age, disability, and medical condition.

He said this consideration is particularly important when the defendant is 95 years old. In such circumstances, courts should carefully examine the person's medical vulnerability, whether detention facilities can provide appropriate medical treatment and care, the effect of detention on the defendant’s ability to prepare and participate in their defence, and whether alternative measures could achieve the same objectives.

Möller also emphasised that the necessity of detention should be reviewed on an ongoing basis. The proportionality of detention can change over time as a defendant’s health, age, and circumstances evolve and as an investigation or trial progresses.

Möller also stressed that the presumption of innocence applies throughout the investigation and trial process, rather than only at the point when a court issues its final judgment.

Referring to Article 14, Paragraph 2 of the ICCPR, he described the presumption of innocence as “one of the cornerstones of criminal justice in a democratic society.”

He explained that public authorities, including police and prosecutors, should not prejudge the outcome of a case or present allegations of guilt as established facts.

At the same time, Möller noted that governments are not prohibited from informing the public about investigations or indictments, nor are politicians prohibited from discussing matters of legitimate public interest.

The key issue, he said, is the language used when discussing an ongoing case.

“Public officials must use neutral and legally accurate language,” Möller emphasised. He said officials should consistently refer to “allegations,” avoid statements or descriptions that imply guilt has already been established, and recognise that determining guilt or innocence is ultimately the responsibility of the courts.

He further warned that statements by senior government officials can contribute to social stigma against a defendant, potentially influence witnesses, and create the perception that the government expects a particular outcome from the courts.

Although professional judges are expected to make independent decisions based solely on the evidence and applicable law, Möller said even the appearance of political pressure can weaken public confidence in the independence and fairness of the judicial process.

Möller also identified a defendant’s cooperation with investigators as a potentially relevant factor when assessing whether continued detention is necessary.

He explained that consistent cooperation with investigative authorities may indicate a lower risk of evidence being destroyed or concealed. Similarly, responding to summonses and voluntarily participating in legal proceedings may be relevant when assessing the risk of flight.

Such conduct may also be considered when determining whether detention is necessary to prevent the recurrence of serious criminal activity.

Ultimately, Möller emphasised that the authority of the judiciary depends not only on the law itself but also on public confidence that judicial proceedings are conducted fairly and independently.

He said courts should make decisions based on clear reasoning, transparency, and consistency. This principle, he stressed, applies equally to decisions concerning pretrial detention.

Rather than relying on generalised or formulaic statements, courts should carefully examine the specific circumstances of each defendant and determine whether detention remains necessary, proportionate, and justified under the applicable legal standards.

More than 75 pastors and religious activists from across the Chicago area gathered on Thursday, 13th August 2026 at a South Side church to endorse a joint statement calling for the release of a 95-year-old Christian leader detained in South Korea.

Held under the banner of the “1st Joint Assembly of World Pastors,” the gathering connected via livestream with approximately 2000 pastors and religious leaders participating at dozens of locations across the United States, Europe, and Asia. The assemblies focused on reports of religious persecution around the world and encouraged religious leaders to work together through networking and advocacy.

The international assemblies called for the release of ManHee Lee, founder and chairman of Shincheonji Church of Jesus, based in Seoul, South Korea. Lee, who is 95, was arrested in June 2026 on allegations of political and election interference—allegations that he and his associates deny.

Participants endorsed a joint statement titled “Declaration of 2000 Global Church Leaders for Freedom of Religion and Human Dignity,” which calls for Lee's release and raises broader concerns about religious freedom and human rights in South Korea.

“Today, approximately 2000 Christian leaders from around the world have gathered here, transcending denominations and borders to protect the freedom of religion and human dignity that are currently under threat,” the statement declared.

The statement cited Article 20 of the South Korean Constitution, which protects freedom of religion and establishes the separation of church and state.

Participants expressed concern over what they described as the stigmatisation and suppression of certain religious groups in South Korea, including references to government discussions surrounding the dissolution of organisations characterized as “pseudo-religions.”

Panellists warned that allowing government authorities to discriminate against one religious group could ultimately threaten religious freedom more broadly.

The statement further declared:

A Shincheonji lecturer associated with the international human rights organisation Human Rights Without Frontiers, also encouraged attendees to sign a letter addressed to the Republic of Korea judiciary calling for Chairman Lee's release.

Throughout the gathering, pastors repeatedly called on religious leaders to speak out against what they described as religious persecution.

“We can no longer remain silent,” several pastors said, emphasising that religion should be protected under constitutional guarantees. They urged religious communities to stand together in defence of people facing persecution because of their faith.

“We must protect those who are suffering because of their faith and speak out against religious persecution in Korea,” participants said. “Oppression continues to grow.”

The Hazel Crest assembly came one week after an international conference in Seoul, South Korea, that was broadcast online from the Seoul Foreign Correspondents Club (SFCC). Organisers and scholars at the conference called on mainstream media outlets to examine the human-rights concerns surrounding Chairman Lee's detention.

Organisers of the assemblies argue that Chairman Lee has been denied due process and say his advocacy reflects principles shared by Christian leaders across denominations, including peacebuilding, international dialogue, and the protection of religious liberty.

“Global churches cannot remain silent,” participants said. “We are raising our voices to say religious freedom must be respected. What we are seeing in South Korea is unprecedented.”

On 13th August, at the Damyang Cultural Center in Damyang-gun, South Jeolla Province, religious leaders and human rights advocates gathered to call for greater protection of the rights of an elderly religious leader, Chairman ManHee Lee of Shincheonji Church of Jesus, who is currently facing legal proceedings.

As a calligrapher wrote a message advocating the protection of the elderly leader’s human rights on a large sheet of traditional Korean paper, attendees watched attentively. When the inscription was completed, the venue filled with applause and chants calling for the protection of human dignity and fundamental rights.

Pastors and religious leaders representing various denominations and faith communities came together to discuss concerns surrounding the detention and treatment of the elderly religious leader. Participants called for humanitarian judicial procedures and a trial without detention, emphasising the importance of protecting his right to life, health, and adequate legal defence.

The event, titled the “1st World Joint Assembly of Pastors” and “Religious Freedom and Trans-denominational Human Rights Solidarity,” was held at the Damyang Cultural Centre under the theme “Protection of Human Rights for the Elderly: Is It Consistent with International Standards?”

The programme addressed a range of issues, including religious freedom, the detention of elderly defendants, and the protection of human rights throughout judicial proceedings.

Photographs and informational materials concerning the elderly defendant’s detention conditions and related human rights issues were displayed in the venue’s first-floor gallery. Attendees examined the exhibits and reviewed information concerning the potential effects of detention conditions on the health and well-being of elderly people.

Jo Hyeon-jeong (pseudonym, 60s, Seo-gu, Gwangju), who viewed the exhibition, said she was concerned about the potential impact of detention conditions on an elderly person’s health.

“Looking at the accommodation environment shown in the photographs, I wondered how an elderly person’s health could be affected by living in such conditions,” she said. “Regardless of the eventual legal judgment, I hope the person’s health and basic human rights will be fully taken into consideration.”

Another participant said the matter should be approached primarily from the perspective of the human rights of an elderly defendant rather than through the lens of religion or denomination.

“The defendant’s health condition and right to a proper defence must be fully considered throughout the judicial process,” the participant said.

Following the exhibition, attendees expressed their views on elderly human rights by placing stickers on a designated board. They also signed petitions calling for a trial without detention and humane treatment.

The event featured presentations by established clerics whose presentations covered topics including the separation of church and state, the rule of law, the role of the National Human Rights Commission, international human rights standards, the presumption of innocence, and the treatment of national veterans.

Rev. Gu Sang-yeol addressed questions surrounding equal treatment in the investigation of religious leaders and the exercise of public authority, focusing on the principles of separation of church and state and the rule of law.

“Regardless of personal preferences or denominational affiliation, fundamental principles of criminal procedure—including the presumption of innocence and the principle of investigation without detention—must be respected,” Rev. Gu said. He added that any assessment of flight risk or the possibility of evidence destruction should take into account the defendant’s age and health condition.

Rev. Park Jong-won spoke on the role of the National Human Rights Commission under the theme “There Are No Sanctuaries or Factions in Human Rights.” Referring to information provided by the organizers that the religious leader had undergone two back surgeries and continues to experience spinal pain, Rev. Park emphasised the need to consider the effects of detention on the health of an elderly person.

“Human rights are not a favour that should be granted selectively according to public opinion or political interests,” Rev. Park said. He called for an examination of whether the elderly defendant’s right to health had been compromised while in detention and urged the relevant authorities to take appropriate protective measures if necessary.

Revd. Heo Jong-hyeon discussed the detention and investigation of elderly defendants from the perspective of international human rights standards. Referring to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the Nelson Mandela Rules, which establish internationally recognised minimum standards for the treatment of prisoners, Father Heo argued that the necessity and proportionality of detention should be carefully assessed.

“The purpose of justice is not punishment or revenge, but to establish the truth and protect human rights through fair procedures,” he said.

He suggested that alternatives to detention—including restrictions on residence or travel and bail—should also be considered where appropriate.

Revd. Heo further emphasised the importance of distinguishing public opinion from judicial decision-making.

He said, “The law is not a popularity contest, and truth is not determined by majority vote.”

Revd. Heo also called for consideration of the health and human rights of Chairman Lee, who is 95 years old, and expressed support for his release on bail.

“What we must protect right now is not any particular denomination,” he said, emphasising that the principles of the presumption of innocence and the rule of law should apply equally to everyone.

Rev. Samuel Park, who identified himself as a Vietnam War veteran, addressed the rights and dignity of veterans under the theme “Is This a Nation That Remembers Sacrifice Written in Blood?”

Rev. Park argued that veterans’ affairs extend beyond financial benefits and should include the protection of the dignity and honour of those who have served their country.

“Veterans’ affairs are not merely about providing allowances; they are about protecting the honour and dignity of those who have dedicated themselves to the nation,” he said.

During the event, participants adopted a joint statement titled the “Declaration of 3000 World Churches for Religious Freedom and Human Dignity.”

The declaration affirmed that religious freedom and the separation of church and state, as provided under Article 20 of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea, are fundamental democratic principles intended to ensure state neutrality towards religion and protect the religious freedom of individuals.

The participants argued that the state should not arbitrarily define, favour, or discriminate against particular religious groups and that freedom of religion should be guaranteed equally across faiths and denominations.

The declaration also highlighted concerns regarding the health and right to life of ManHee Lee, the 95-year-old Chairman of Shincheonji Church of Jesus and a Korean War veteran. Participants called on the government and political authorities to avoid turning particular religious groups into subjects of political conflict.

They further urged the judiciary to uphold the presumption of innocence and consider bail in accordance with applicable legal principles.

Following the adoption of the statement, participants stood together and called for an end to what they described as excessive detention that threatens the health and human rights of elderly defendants.

They also chanted slogans calling for the immediate protection of the right to defence, consideration of the defendant’s age and health, and the granting of bail.

The event concluded with a calligraphy performance on a large sheet of traditional Korean paper. Messages calling for the protection of elderly religious leaders’ human rights were written during the performance, followed by chants from the participants.

The gathering concluded with prayers and the recitation of the Lord’s Prayer.

Organisers stated that they intend to submit the joint declaration, petition, and other documents adopted at the event to relevant institutions, including the National Human Rights Commission and veterans’ affairs authorities. They also announced plans to continue related solidarity and human rights advocacy activities.

Throughout the gathering, participants emphasised that the protection of human dignity, health, religious freedom, and the right to a fair legal defence should apply equally to all individuals, regardless of age, religious affiliation, or public opinion.

More than 100 pastors gathered in Jeonju, Jeonbuk Province, to raise concerns about the activities of certain heresy-detector organisations and practices involving coercive conversion. The pastors affirmed their commitment to ministry that respects religious freedom, human dignity, and human rights.

The second session was held under the theme “Exposing the Grand Deception of Korean Christian Heresy Detectors.” The programme included presentations  involving forced conversion, and the reading of a joint resolution.

In his presentation, Rev. Choi Woo-seong argued that some heresy detectors have spread what he described as distorted information about particular religious groups and have encouraged families to pursue coercive conversion. He stated that such practices can infringe upon religious freedom and personal dignity and may contribute to family conflict and, in some cases, violence.

Rev. Choi referred to a June 2022 incident in Jeongeup as an example. In that case, a man murdered his former wife and sister-in-law and seriously injured his brother-in-law. According to Rev. Choi, the perpetrator cited the victims’ religious activities when explaining the motive for the crime, leading some to characterise the incident primarily as a religious conflict.

Rev. Choi argued that the broader environment surrounding the stigmatisation of certain religious groups can create circumstances in which perpetrators attempt to shift responsibility for their actions onto a victim’s religious beliefs.

He further alleged that some individuals involved in heresy-related counseling approach families under the guise of providing "counselling", heighten their concerns about a family member’s religious affiliation, and subsequently encourage or assist in acts such as kidnapping, confinement, or assault. These claims were presented as concerns requiring greater scrutiny and accountability within the Christian community.

Rev. Choi also introduced Dr. Hwang Kyu-hak’s book, The Great Deception of the Korean Church by Heresy Detectors, which examines the activities of certain heresy-detector organisations.

Rev. Choi warned that stigmatisation and discrimination against members of particular religious groups can develop into broader patterns of misinformation and hate speech and, ultimately, create an environment in which physical violence is more readily justified.

He called on pastors and church members to take the lead in opposing coercive conversion.

“The church, which should protect and love its neighbours, must not become a breeding ground for hate crimes or a channel for perpetrators to make excuses,” he said.

Rev. Kang Seong-ho shared his own experience of referring a church member to a conversion-counselling agency in Gwangju after concluding that the individual had fallen into heresy. The member subsequently received approximately three months of counselling at the agency.

Looking back, Rev. Kang acknowledged that he had labelled the church member as a heretic without having sufficiently examined the distinction between heresy, truth, and falsehood for himself.

After several associate pastors, elders, senior deaconesses, and deacons left his church, Rev. Kang said he began researching the subject independently. He watched YouTube lectures by Shincheonji instructors and studied the material himself in an effort to compare the group’s actual teachings with what he had previously heard from outside sources.

He also recalled visiting the church member whom he had previously referred for conversion counselling and personally apologising, saying, “I am sorry.”

Rev. Kang said he now emphasises Bible study and ongoing education within his congregation, explaining that he studies the Bible with church members approximately four times a week.

“I believe that for the church to exist, it must continue to study and nurture with the truth and the Word until the end; only then will the church be sustained, the congregation expand, and great glory be given to the Lord,” Rev. Kang said.

At the conclusion of the assembly, the participants read the “Resolution to Defend Truth and Religious Freedom” and pledged to pursue ministry that respects religious freedom and human rights.

The resolution calls for responsible ministry based on the Bible and verifiable facts, while rejecting distorted information, misinformation, and incitement. The participants also expressed their opposition to coercive conversion practices involving coercion, confinement, violence, or the administration of drugs, and affirmed their commitment to protecting the human rights and religious freedom of all individuals.

The pastors further resolved to reject language that promotes hatred and division and instead pursue a ministry centred on love, reconciliation, and the restoration of wounded families and communities.

They emphasised that no person’s dignity, freedom of conscience, or religious liberty should be violated in the name of the church.

Through the resolution, the participants reaffirmed their commitment to a Christian ministry that seeks to protect human dignity, respect freedom of conscience, and promote reconciliation rather than coercion and division.

Source: vo.la/y6abUgr

On 13th August, 3156 pastors from 55 countries voiced serious concerns about what they described as recent infringements on religious freedom and challenges to the principle of separation of church and state in South Korea.

Five religious organisations gathered for the 1st World Joint Assembly of Pastors and issued a collective statement on the matter.

Participants expressed concern over what they regarded as excessive detention investigations and judicial pressure involving prominent religious leaders. They described these actions as potential violations of religious freedom and human rights and argued that the rule of law should be applied fairly and without discrimination based on religious affiliation.

The assembly specifically addressed the recent arrests and indictments of religious leaders, including Shincheonji Chairman ManHee Lee. Participants argued that such investigations should respect the constitutional presumption of innocence and the principle that detention should be used only when legally necessary.

Speakers repeatedly emphasised that investigative and judicial procedures should not disproportionately target particular religions or denominations.

Several speakers also stressed that judicial decisions should be based on evidence and law rather than public sentiment.

Anglican priest Heo Jong-hyeon warned that public anger, even when perceived as a demand for justice, should not determine judicial outcomes. He argued that what he characterised as a “witch-hunt style trial” could undermine the fundamental rights of an elderly religious leader if public pressure were allowed to take precedence over evidence and due process.

The assembly also highlighted concerns about government involvement in religious affairs and reaffirmed the importance of the separation of church and state.

Presbytery Chairman Kim Geon described the separation of church and state as an essential safeguard against excessive government interference in religious matters. He expressed concern that investigating internal religious activities and doctrines, imposing targeted tax audits, or pursuing the forced dissolution of religious organisations could undermine the constitutional principle of religious freedom.

Rev. Rugagi Innocent of the Evangelical Church of Rwanda, the final speaker, emphasised the importance of international solidarity on issues of religious freedom. Drawing on the experiences of churches in Africa, he warned of the consequences that can arise when government authorities seek to exercise excessive control over religious life.

He stated that, because faith transcends national and denominational boundaries, churches around the world should stand together in support of religious freedom in South Korea.

Participants also raised concerns about institutional policies that they believe could adversely affect church activities. Particular attention was given to discussions surrounding a proposed “Dissolution of Religious Corporations Act,” which participants said could give the government significant authority to dissolve religious organisations.

Rev. Im Young-woong of the Presbyterian Church of Korea warned that allowing the government to dissolve a religious corporation could establish a precedent that threatens religious freedom more broadly.

The assembly concluded with the release of a Joint Statement signed by more than 3000 pastors from around the world. Among its principal demands were:

The organisers emphasised that they view the matter as a broader religious-freedom issue rather than a dispute involving only one denomination.

“The cases presented are not just an issue for a particular denomination, but a serious warning signal regarding religious freedom in South Korea as a whole,” the organisers stated. They added that they intend to continue working with international human rights organisations and churches around the world until, in their view, the principles of fair justice and separation of church and state are upheld.

Source: vo.la/MVBGbGu

Alexandru Tănase, former President of the Constitutional Court of Moldova, emphasised that the necessity and proportionality of the continued detention of ManHee Lee, Chairman of Shincheonji Church of Jesus, the Temple of the Tabernacle of the Testimony, who is currently standing trial while detained, should be assessed by taking into account all relevant circumstances, including his age, health, and the risk of flight.

Tănase explained that, under the European legal framework, advanced age does not in itself exempt an individual from criminal proceedings. However, a person’s age may be an important consideration when courts assess whether pretrial detention is necessary and proportionate.

Tănase previously served as Minister of Justice of the Republic of Moldova, President of the Constitutional Court, and a member of the European Commission for Democracy through Law. As a specialist in constitutional law and human rights, he has extensive experience in judicial reform, the rule of law, and the protection of fundamental rights.

While stressing that he would not comment on the merits of an ongoing case in Korea or any other country, Tănase expressed confidence in Korea’s judicial system.

“I believe it is appropriate not to express an opinion on specific ongoing cases, whether in Korea or another country,” he said. “The Republic of Korea is a democratic nation with a well-established legal system, and I have full confidence that the Korean judiciary will judge this case in accordance with the law, the evidence submitted to the court, and the principles of a fair trial.”

At the same time, he noted that the principles established under the European Convention on Human Rights require any deprivation of personal liberty to be lawful and to constitute a necessary and proportionate measure aimed at achieving a legitimate purpose.

He explained that courts should generally consider the circumstances of each individual case as a whole, including the person’s age and health, the risk of flight, the possible effect on the proceedings, and whether the same legitimate objective could be achieved through less restrictive measures.

Tănase also stressed that respect for human dignity must remain a fundamental principle throughout the judicial process.

“Respect for human dignity is a fundamental principle that must be upheld throughout the entire judicial process,” he stated. “The proper administration of justice and the protection of individual rights are not conflicting values, but mutually complementary elements of the rule of law.”

Tănase further emphasised that judicial proceedings should not be influenced by public opinion, political pressure, or social prejudice.

“The most important duty of the court is to ensure that justice is conducted according to the law, not by public opinion or political expediency,” he said. “In every democratic society, courts function in an environment where social debate, media attention, and political views exist, but judges must make decisions solely on the basis of the law, the evidence submitted to the court, and the applicable legal standards.”

He explained that judicial independence should not be viewed as a privilege granted to judges, but rather as a safeguard designed to ensure that every citizen has access to an impartial and fair judicial process.

“The independence of the judiciary is not a privilege granted to judges,” Tănase said. Rather, it is “intended to ensure that the disputes of all citizens can be adjudicated by an impartial court.”

Tănase also highlighted the fundamental importance of the presumption of innocence.

“Everyone should be treated as innocent until proven guilty through a fair judicial process,” he stated.

According to Tănase, several principles are essential to ensuring judicial fairness and neutrality, including the independence of judicial institutions, security of judicial tenure, transparent procedures, well-reasoned judgments, equality of arms between the parties, and full respect for due process.

“These principles not only protect the rights of the parties involved in a case but also play a role in safeguarding public trust in the judiciary,” he said. “Ultimately, the legitimacy of the judiciary depends not on public popularity, but on how faithfully it adheres to fairness, neutrality, and the rule of law.”

Tănase identified fidelity to the law and the Constitution as a central principle throughout his legal career.

“Judges do not exist to satisfy public expectations or political interests,” he said. “It is a judge’s duty to apply the law fairly and independently while respecting the dignity and rights of every individual.”

He further emphasised that judicial independence, equality before the law, procedural fairness, and reasoned judgments are indispensable foundations of a democratic legal system.

Source: vo.la/bzwaUwm

Guri Traditional Market is one of the area’s representative traditional markets, with a history spanning more than 60 years since its beginnings as an alley market. Today, approximately 390 shops are in operation, and the market was officially designated as an accredited market in 2005. It has since grown into a major commercial hub, attracting around one million residents from Guri City and neighbouring areas.

To provide comfort and practical support to market merchants facing the challenges of the prolonged heatwave and economic downturn, while also revitalising the struggling commercial district, the Guri and Namyangju branches mobilised 38 volunteers at Guri Traditional Market for a dynamic "Market Shopping" campaign on 11th August.

Mr. A, who has operated a Korean restaurant in Gwacheon, Gyeonggi Province, for the past 30 years, expressed concern about the growing opposition to the proposed change of use of Shincheonji Church of Jesus, the Temple of the Tabernacle of the Testimony in Gwacheon. Tensions have recently intensified in the area, including efforts to gather signatures against the proposed change.

Local merchants say business has already declined since the temple closed six years ago. They worry that continued opposition and exclusionary actions directed at Shincheonji could further hurt the surrounding commercial district and negatively affect local businesses.

In 2006, Shincheonji Church purchased the ninth floor of Newcore Department Store building situated in Byeoryang-dong, Gwacheon, changed the use of the location from “group of facilities for commerce” to “group of facilities for cultural activities and assembly,” and used it as a religious facility (church) for over 15 years without any objection from the city.

However, during the outbreak of COVID-19 in February 2020, the city arbitrarily shut down the church facility with no legal grounds. Even after the pandemic has effectively subsided, the city issued a notice in January 2023, requiring Shincheonji Church to use the venue strictly according to the purpose of cultural activities and assembly and threatened to impose charges for compelling compliance if this is violated. This was a move that practically banned religious activities.

Shincheonji Church subsequently filed twice to change the use of the facility into a religious location, but the city declined them, citing transportation, safety, complaints, community conflicts, etc. as reasons. However, the court dismissed these in full.