Court Rules “Shincheonji Submitted Everything”, as 'Not Guilty' Verdict is Issued to Chairman Man-hee Lee (14th Jan. 2021)
Epidemiological analysis is necessary to understand the scale of the outbreak and routes of transmission
Demand for submission of all Shincheonji facilities and congregants' personal details 'did not constitute an epidemiological investigation but preparation for another investigation'
“List submitted showed a few minor omissions. Shincheonji actively cooperated with the government”
[Cheonji Ilbo = Reporter Hong Soo-young] Man-hee Lee of 'Shincheonji Church of Jesus, the Temple of the Tabernacle of the Testimony (Shincheonji Church)' was acquitted of all charges related to violation of the Infectious Disease and Control Prevention Act, which attracted most attention among all charges made by the prosecution. Let's examine the reasons for the 'not guilty' verdict administered by the judge.
According to court papers on the 14th January 2021, the presiding judge at Suwon District Court (Judge Mi-gyeong Kim) acquitted Chairman Lee of all charges related to violation of the Infectious Disease and Control Prevention Act, including alleged obstruction of government efforts in curbing the spread of the disease.
On February 22nd the year before (2020), the prosecution provided the status of all 1100 Shincheonji-related facilities to Korea's Central Disease Control Headquarters (CDCH), and alleged that Shincheonji obstructed epidemiological investigations and submitted inaccurate data, citing roughly 750 omissions. In addition, on the 24th of that month, Chairman Lee submitted a list containing the names, dates of birth, gender, addresses and phone numbers of 212,324 congregants the day after an official request from the CDCH. Charges were made that 100,000s of resident registration numbers were omitted.
◆ Court ruled “epidemiological investigation ≠ data submission”
The Ministry of Justice stated that, “An epidemiological investigation should constitute efforts to determine the number of infectious cases, the source and pathway of infection, the cause of adverse reactions upon vaccination, patient symptoms and other related matters that serve in identifying the cause of this infectious disease. This is something that should be carried out through medical examinations and consultations.”
The Ministry of Justice added, “The request for submission was not based on the personal information of the infected patient or the location of the outbreak, but rather a list of all Shincheonji facilities and members regardless of who was infected. Their request, therefore, failed to meet the requirements of an epidemiological investigation. The letter of request did not contain questionnaire surveys, interviews etc., so it did not fall in line with the requirements for epidemiological investigation." In other words, their statement confirmed that the submission of facilities and members did not constitute an epidemiological investigation.
The Ministry of Justice also explained, "Providing a list of all Shincheonji facilities and members does not constitute an epidemiological investigation, but rather a collection of data in preparation for an investigation. The CDCH also recorded 'provision of information for epidemiological investigation' within their official document."
◆“Unfavourable bias towards the defendant is considered impermissible by the court”
The Ministry of Justice said, “Prosecutors claim that collection of data for epidemiological investigations constitutes the requirements of an epidemiological investigation, but not when it risks exposing one's personal information, infringing on one's right to privacy, and presupposition about criminal liability. Unfavourable bias towards the defendant is considered impermissible by the court."
◆“Unfavourable bias towards the defendant is considered impermissible by the court”
The Ministry of Justice said, “Prosecutors claim that collection of data for epidemiological investigations constitutes the requirements of an epidemiological investigation, but not when it risks exposing one's personal information, infringing on one's right to privacy, and presupposition about criminal liability. Unfavourable bias towards the defendant is considered impermissible by the court."
In particular, it clarified that there was unreasonable extension and interpretation of regulatory boundaries necessary for epidemiological investigation as required data could be requested in accordance with the 'Request for Information' stipulated in Article 76-2 of the Infectious Disease Control and Prevention Act. Concerns were raised that the refusal to collect data would hinder quarantine efforts, but the Ministry of Justice stated, "'Punishment Regulation' as stipulated in Article 79 2-3 was newly incorporated on September 29th 2020 so refusal to collect data is a punishable offence. Therefore, there is no need to be concerned over punishment for cooperating."
◆“Shincheonji submitted a full list of all facilities, leaving just four omissions”
Chairman Lee was also acquitted of charges of obstructing the execution of hierarchical public affairs. The Ministry of Justice said, “Only four mission centers were omitted from the initial submission, and the submission of these facilities did not fall within the scope of the 'Request for Information' pertaining to the Infectious Disease Control and Prevention Act.” It was stated that, in accordance with Article 5 of the Framework Act on Administrative Investigation, requesting the submission of data by an administrative agency for the collection of necessary information can be carried out through voluntary cooperation without need of a legal provision.
◆“Submission of facility status and cooperation with administrative investigation...No basis for punishment”
The judge emphasised, "In this case, the person subject to administrative investigation has legal grounds to reject such investigation without fear of punishment. Of course, there can not be punishment for those who do not cooperate and no punishment for those who do." In other words, from the outset, the request for submission of all facilities was voluntary and not subject to punishment.
The CDCH also testified that the types of facilities for submission requested within the official letter and its corresponding deadline were not clearly specified. Accordingly, the judiciary ruled that there was no obstruction to the execution of hierarchical public affairs.
◆ “Shincheonji's submission of a full list of members” acknowledged
Regarding the list of congregation members, Shincheonji's General Assembly Headquarters initially agreed to submit a list of its members with the head of the Office of Civil Affairs on February 24th 2020, and following a report sent to Chairman Lee, the content of discussion was posted on the Internet the same day, with the actual full list of members sent the following day. It was judged difficult to argue the case for any omission of data on Chairman Lee's behalf.
In addition, Shincheonji affirmed that it provided the list of all church members, while requests for a change in registration were made by eight congregants before the request for submission of the list was made. As a result, the resident registration numbers were not included, affecting 'date of birth' data.
In addition, the Ministry of Justice explained, "CDCH officials also testified that, 'Shincheonji actively cooperated with the request of health authorities to submit data and provided it as quickly as possible', thereby affirming their innocence."
0 comments