Human Rights Commission: "Differential Application of Hair Regulations for Military Officers and Soldiers Must Be Improved"

[Asia Economy Reporter Lee Gwan-ju] The National Human Rights Commission of Korea (NHRCK) has determined that improvements are needed in the hair regulations that are applied differently to military officers and enlisted soldiers.

On the 15th, the NHRCK recommended to the Minister of National Defense that, while considering the mission characteristics of each military branch, the hair regulations be improved to eliminate discrimination between officers and enlisted soldiers, and that measures be established to prevent human rights violations related to the application of hair regulations within subordinate units of each branch.

Last September, the NHRCK received a complaint stating that allowing both the officer standard style and sports style for Air Force officers, while permitting only the sports style for enlisted soldiers, constitutes discriminatory behavior. Viewing the issue of differential application of hair regulations as a problem affecting all branches, the NHRCK decided in April this year to expand the investigation to all military branches through an ex officio inquiry.

The NHRCK reviewed military regulations, conducted interviews with officers and enlisted soldiers, and analyzed overseas cases comprehensively. In practice, enlisted soldiers are unified under the sports style due to reasons such as communal living, wearing protective gear, lack of professional barbers within units, and concerns about creating discord, whereas officers are allowed to choose between the officer standard style and the sports style considering their social life after duty hours.

Overseas, countries with volunteer military systems such as the United States, the United Kingdom, France, and Germany, as well as Israel, which operates conscription, impose restrictions on soldiers' hair length but do not apply differential standards based on rank. In interviews with officers and enlisted soldiers from each branch, many interviewees acknowledged the necessity of hair regulations in preparation for wartime situations but expressed that, considering both officers and enlisted soldiers must participate in wartime, there is no reasonable justification for differential application, and that system improvements are needed.

Summarizing these findings, the NHRCK judged that applying hair regulations differently to officers and enlisted soldiers infringes on the right to equality, given that both fundamentally belong to an organization that performs and prepares for combat missions. Furthermore, since human rights violations and complaints related to hair regulations have occurred in each branch, and there have been cases where the NHRCK recommended disciplinary action after viewing an officer personally cutting a soldier’s hair due to its length as an infringement on bodily freedom, the NHRCK sees the need for each branch to establish measures to prevent human rights violations.

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