The Constitutional Court to Deliver Ruling Today on Unconstitutionality of Laws Regarding Eligibility for Disability Activity Support Benefits

Ruling on the Constitutional Review Case of Article 5, Paragraph 2 of the Disabled Activities Act at 2 PM Today

Constitutional Court Grand Bench. [Photo by Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Kim Suhwan] On the 23rd, the Constitutional Court will deliver a ruling on whether the provision of the Act on Support for Disabled Persons' Activities, which excludes people receiving long-term care benefits for the elderly from the eligibility for disability activity support benefits, violates the right to equality and is unconstitutional.

The Constitutional Court will hold a judgment session at 2 p.m. in the grand chamber to decide on the constitutional review case regarding Article 5, Paragraph 2 of the Act on Support for Disabled Persons' Activities, requested by the Gwangju District Court.

A, a person with a severe brain lesion disability classified as Grade 1, applied to the district office in 2016 to change the long-term care benefits he was receiving to disability activity benefits.

Generally, disability activity benefits are higher in amount than long-term care benefits, and unlike elderly long-term care benefits which provide up to 4 hours of activity assistance services per day, disability activity benefits can provide services for up to 24 hours.

However, the district office rejected A's application, and A filed a cancellation lawsuit.

During the lawsuit, A requested the court to submit a constitutional review petition regarding Article 5, Items 2 and 3 of the Act on Support for Disabled Persons' Activities.

Article 5, Item 2 stipulates that even though severely disabled persons under 65 years old can receive activity support benefits, those who fall under the elderly category defined by the Long-Term Care Insurance Act for the Elderly lose their eligibility for activity support benefits. Item 3 stipulates that disabled persons receiving benefits similar to activity support benefits cannot receive activity support benefits.

The Gwangju District Court judged that Item 3 has rationality in preventing overlapping social security service payments and dismissed the request for constitutional review. On the other hand, it found reasonable grounds to suspect that Item 2 is unconstitutional and submitted a constitutional review petition to the Constitutional Court.

In applying for the constitutional review petition, A's side pointed out, "There is a significant difference in the content and amount of benefits between elderly long-term care benefits and disability activity support benefits," and "The provision excludes applicants from eligibility for disability activity support benefits without granting the applicant the right to choose benefits."

They further argued, "This infringes on the life rights of disabled persons, human dignity, the right to independent living, the right to a humane life, and the right to equality for the sake of securing national finances or administrative convenience."

On the other hand, the Ministry of Health and Welfare argued, "Elderly long-term care benefits and disability activity support benefits are separate systems targeting recipients appropriate to the content of the benefits," and "For the sustainable operation of the system guaranteeing social security benefits, consideration of finances is necessary, and the discretion of the legislature should be respected."

The Constitutional Court held a public hearing in the grand chamber on June 11 to hear the positions of both A and the Ministry of Health and Welfare.

At the public hearing, Kim Donggi, a professor in the Department of Social Welfare at Mokwon University, attended as a witness for A's side, and Hwang Juhee, a senior research fellow at the Korea Institute for Health and Social Affairs, attended as a witness for the Ministry of Health and Welfare, each presenting their opinions.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.