The Shincheonji Case and the Question of Selective Justice
 |
| Yong-seok Seok, Head of the Future Solidarity Seoul City Party |
Politician Yong-seok Seok, head of the Future Solidarity Seoul City Party, expresses his stance on the continued detention of Shincheonji Chairman ManHee Lee.
---------------
Observing the arrest of Shincheonji Chairman ManHee Lee, one cannot help but raise strong questions. The relationship between religious organisations and the political sphere is nothing new. With every election, political parties seek organisations and votes, and members of religious groups have also participated in politics as citizens. However, if responsibility is concentrated solely on a specific region and one political force when issues arise, the issue of fairness must be examined first.
The Joint Investigation Headquarters investigated allegations that Shincheonji followers had collectively joined the people Power Party and arrested and indicted Chairman Lee. However, it has also detected indications that followers have also collectively joined the Democratic Party and is expanding its investigation. At the Democratic Party's national convention, former Prime Minister Min-suk Kim raised the "Shincheonji intervention theory", to which candidate Chang-rae Jeong strongly objected. The reality that political controversies related to Shincheonji have erupted in both the ruling and opposition parties raises the question of whether this issue can be viewed simply as a matter of collusion between a specific political party and a specific religion.
Through my firsthand experience with Shincheonji, I witnessed aspects that differed from the public stigma. There are certainly positive aspects to seeing young believers study the Bible and establish behavioural norms and goals within the community. The state should not apply the judgment of an established denomination as a "heresy" to the standard of justice. What the state should consider is not which doctrine is correct, but whether specific actions have violated the law.
What is even more concerning is the moment when the judiciary appears to be acting according to political needs. The chairman and executives of the People Power Party were arrested in connection with allegations; if similar controversies regarding political participation arise within the ruling party, the public will question whether the same standards are being applied. The mere fact that allegations have been raised regarding the Democratic Party does not erase existing changes. However, the need to re-examine the necessity of arrests and the fairness of the investigation has grown significantly.
Chairman Lee is a state-registered veteran who participated in the Korean War and is an extremely elderly individual at the age of 95. The Ministry of Patriots and Veterans Affairs has confirmed his participation in the war from 1952 to 1953 and his registration as a veteran in 2015. While he cannot be exempted from legal responsibility simply because he is a veteran, the necessity of continuing to detain an elderly person who sacrificed his youth for the nation must be asked separately. Detention is not punishment. Given that he requested bail on 4th August, the court must re-evaluate his age, health, concerns regarding the destruction of evidence, and his ability to attend court.
If politics exploits religion when it suits it and makes it a scapegoat when it is disadvantageous, the spirit of the separation of church and state is undermined. The judiciary must side with the law, not politics. I hope that Chairman Lee is released to stand a fair trial while out of custody, and that the allegations are investigated using the same standards applied regardless of party affiliation. Only then can the state escape the suspicion of 'selective justice.'
---------------
With political and international religious voices calling attention to Chairman Lee's detention, the question remains: Does justice truly apply equally to everyone?
0 comments