“I really hope that alternative service will be expanded into the care sector, but right now I’m just in prison.”

 

This is how Jang Gil-wan, who is currently doing alternative service, expressed his disappointment in the current system at the “Talk Show to Explore Ways to Improve the Alternative Service System” held at the Seoul Forest branch of Heyground on May 12th. You might be wondering what the heck he was talking about. Let’s start with the part related to alternative service.

 

On June 28th, 2018, the Constitutional Court ruled that the Military Service Act’s failure to recognize alternative service was unconstitutional. Accordingly, on December 27th, 2019, the National Assembly enacted the Act on Assignment to and Performance of Alternative Service, establishing an alternative to military service for male South Korean citizens for the first time. In June 2020, the Alternative Service Review Board was launched as an independent agency under the Military Manpower Administration, and in October 2020, the first 63 alternative service personnel were called up for service.

 

This means it has already been more than three years since it became possible for those who refuse military service on religious, moral, or pacifist grounds to choose alternative service. That first cohort of alternative service personnel called up in October 2020 was discharged in October of last year.

 

▲ On May 12th, 2024, Hanjumdan held the “Talk Show to Explore Ways to Improve the Alternative Service System.” The text on the screen reads, “What kind of place is the Alternative Service Review [Board]? How does the review work?”   ©Ilda

However, these facts are not very well known. Since conscientious objectors can now perform alternative service instead of receiving ‘punishment’ (prison time), the public’s interest in conscientious objection to military service has also decreased. Since they’re doing alternative service, isn’t everything okay now? But why are alternative servicemen still in prison? 

 

There was a gathering of people with something to say about this little-known system that is in need of change. Shortly before World Objection to Military Service Day (May 15), Hanjumdan, an activist group seeking to improve the alternative service system, held the “Talk Show” mentioned above, which featured active alternative service members and former Alternative Service Review Board members telling stories that had never been heard anywhere else.

 

They keep demanding proof, proof... review processes that slide into insults and hate speech

 

Not all conscientious objectors are eligible for alternative service. In order to perform alternative service, you must pass a review conducted by the Alternative Service Review Board. Currently, the number of judges has been reduced to 13, but initially there were 29 judges recommended by organizations such as the Ministry of National Defense, the Military Manpower Administration, the National Human Rights Commission, the Ministry of Justice, and the National Defense Committee of the National Assembly. These judges perform the review.

 

Baek Seung-deok, a researcher who served on the review committee as a conscientious objector himself and researcher of military service discourse and systems, said, “There are a total of four hurdles in the review.” First of all, for the document review, which requires producing a lot of paperwork, the applicant must “submit their own statement, statements from three references, their school records, and more.” Afterwards, “investigators from the secretariat investigate the subject as if they were conducting a police investigation,” and then the person also undergoes a “preliminary hearing in front of a small panel of judges.” Lastly, there is a “plenary meeting,” where it is decided whether or not the application (for alternative service) will be accepted.

 

Activist Ryu Eun-sook, another former judge, pointed out, “There are some among the judges who try to find ‘pure’ applicants.” He continued, “The word purity is actually a very dangerous word. But there are people who, saying they will filter out that ‘impurity,’ try to find evidence that the applicant is not ‘pure.’ The idea is to find flaws by asking questions that will put the applicant in a difficult position.”

 

That's not the only hurdle. In fact, many of the judges are not very interested in this system or do not properly understand the various reasons applicants cite for pursuing alternative service. Activist Ryu Eun-sook said, “One of the applicants was a sexual minority [a member of the LGBTQ+ community], and some judges did not understand the term ‘sexual orientation’ itself, which he had mentioned in his statement. So, they used offensive terms like ‘sodomy,’ or when the applicant was a vegan, they’d say,  ‘Are you really doing this only because of your eating habits?’” Mr. Ryu emphasized that one of the problems with the current screening system is that “some applicants experience truly humiliating situations.”

 

▲ A promotional graphic for the “Talk Show to Explore Ways to Improve the Alternative Service System.” In addition to the basic details of the event, it reads:“Alternative Service Sweet Potato Show: What’s the Point of [Conscientious] Objecting? Revealed for the first time!A talk show that lets you hear stories of the hard-to-swallow reality of alternative service in prison and refreshing criticism directly from alternative service personnel!” [Translator’s note: Sweet potato is famous in Korea as a food that often gets stuck in the throat or esophagus, and the word for this feeling (dapdapham) is also used to describe a frustrating situation.]

Neither soldiers nor prisoners – alternative servicemen on the boundary

 

So what happens after a person passes this problematic screening process and is selected for alternative service? The service period for conscientious objectors is 36 months, which is twice that of active duty soldiers. And the institutions in which they can serve is limited to correctional facilities.

 

Geon-hee is a former seminary student who, after participating in various social movements, learned about conscientious objection to military service at a feminism seminar and decided to pursue alternative service. Gil-wan chose to conscientiously object while participating in a civic group, after being part of a feminist club and the sexual minority rights movement in university. The two discussed their experiences at the talk show.

 

The two are currently doing alternative service in a prison called a “correctional facility [gyojeongshiseol].” Gil-wan explained his current position by saying, “I’m in an ambiguous position, where it’s very confusing whether I’m a soldier or a prisoner.” Alternative service personnel live in barracks, are supervised by service officials, and have restrictions on their going out and staying out overnight. The work done by alternative service personnel is not much different from the work that those who were imprisoned for conscientious objection to military service used to do. This includes providing operational support for the correctional facilities or being responsible for cleaning tasks.

 

They chose alternative service in opposition to the military's hierarchical structure, war, and violence, but the reality is that their situation has turned out to be similar to that of soldiers. Gil-wan pointed out, “Active military service is still set as the default, and practices and beliefs that question militarism and the military service system are not well-known or respected.” Military discipline and rules exist and alternative servicemen are forced to follow them. This is clear by how “service officials often say, ‘There must be equality with active-duty soldiers.’”

 

As a result, the position in which alternative service personnel find themselves becomes fuzzy. Additionally, since the majority of alternative service personnel are Jehovah's Witnesses, many parts of the system were made with them in mind, which further alienates everyone else. Currently, Geon-hee is the only alternative serviceman in his facility who is not a Jehovah's Witness. Alternative service personnel are enduring their time in frustration in a space that “has no education system related to [service activities more in line with] the pacifist beliefs that led [them] to choose alternative service.”

 

▲ On December 28, 2018, before the alternative service system was created, civil society organizations including Amnesty International Korea Branch, the Military Human Rights Center, Lawyers for a Democratic Society, World Without War, and People's Solidarity for Participatory Democracy protested in front of the main gate of the Ministry of National Defense in response to problematic elements of the government’s proposal for the system, such as the 36-month service term and the limitations on areas in which service could take place. ©A World Without War

Is there any reason to limit alternative service to prison work?

 

There are more than one or two problems that alternative service personnel have pointed out with the current system, but the area they expressed their most urgent wish for change in is the scope of the service.

 

Gil-wan explained, “It has been pointed out that the military is a space in Korean society that hierarchizes the bodies of citizens and creates discrimination against minorities, and correctional facilities are also a space that is managed in a similar way.” He also said, “I hope that alternative service personnel can move into society a little more, and that our existence becomes more visible instead of being confined to a certain space like now.” Geon-hee opined, “The alternative service system should be integrated into society a little more.”

 

Mr. Ryu, the activist and former review board judge, said, “When we screened those who wanted to do alternative service, the jobs they wanted were things like caring for people with disabilities and caring for the elderly in farming and fishing villages,” and argued that the current system, with its limiting of service areas to prisons, needs to change. In addition, he pointed out that “the current way of thinking (about the alternative service system) is still focused on comparing and competing with active duty,” emphasizing, “We need to think of contributions to the community not as a competition but with respect for the diversity of contributions.”

 

Regarding the point that the alternative service period is three years, the participants said that rather than talking about how much time is appropriate, it is more important to think about what kind of service can be done and how, and how the alternative service workers’ beliefs and their social value ​​can be brought into alignment. Gil-wan even made this somewhat bold statement: “If the scope of service becomes truly diverse, I think it would be okay if the service period is long.” He added, “One of the big topics in the disability community these days is deinstitutionalization, so what if alternative service personnel provided the support that disabled people need to live after deinstitutionalization? Wouldn’t it be possible to do that and commute to and from work [living in your own lodgings instead of barracks]?”

 

Mr. Ryu said, “The imposition of care work on women is also connected to the Republic of Korea’s military service system and the structural violence of this society, which is hierarchized around ‘bodies capable of military duty,’” and expressed the need for greater interest in alternative service and peace movements. [Translated by Marilyn Hook]

 

Original Article: https://ildaro.com/9910 Published May 17, 2024

 

◆ To see more English-language articles from Ilda, visit our English blog(https://ildaro.blogspot.com).

기사 내용과 관련이 없는 글, 욕설을 사용하는 등 타인의 명예를 훼손하는 글은 관리자에 의해 예고없이 임의 삭제될 수 있으므로 주의하시기 바랍니다. 댓글 작성 시 상대방에 대한 배려와 책임을 담아주세요.

• 닉네임
• 비밀번호
• 
• 도배방지 입력