Child Abuse Convicts Banned from Appointment as Public Officials and Non-Commissioned Officers... Constitutional Court Rules "Violation of Public Office Rights"

Constitutional Court: "Considering Crime Nature, Achieve Legislative Purpose by Less Infringing Means"
Dissenting Opinion: "Criminals with High Social Blame, Damage Public Trust"

Chief Justice Yoo Nam-seok of the Constitutional Court and the constitutional justices entered the grand bench of the Constitutional Court in Jongno-gu, Seoul, on the afternoon of the 24th to begin the November ruling.
[Image source=Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Heo Kyung-jun] The Constitutional Court has ruled that the current law prohibiting the appointment of individuals convicted of sexual abuse acts, such as sexual harassment causing sexual shame to children, as public officials or professional soldiers is unconstitutional.

On the 24th, the Constitutional Court issued a decision of constitutional inconsistency by a 6 to 3 vote regarding the constitutional complaint that Article 33 of the National Public Officials Act and Article 10 of the Military Personnel Act infringe on the freedom of occupational choice.

Constitutional inconsistency acknowledges the unconstitutionality of the legal provisions but maintains them for a set period to prevent confusion that would arise if the provisions were immediately invalidated and to allow the National Assembly to enact substitute legislation. The deadline for legislative amendment set by the Constitutional Court is May 31, 2024.

The petitioner, Mr. A, was tried and sentenced to a fine of 4 million won and 40 hours of sexual violence treatment program completion in November 2019 for sending text messages to a child victim causing sexual shame through sexual harassment and other sexual abuse acts, and the sentence was finalized. However, Mr. A was exempted from the order to disclose and notify personal information and the employment restriction order.

Afterward, Mr. A enlisted in the Air Force and applied to become a paid volunteer soldier (specialized sergeant, non-commissioned officer) and planned to apply as a civilian non-commissioned officer after discharge. However, due to the conviction for violating the Child Welfare Act, he was unable to apply. He filed a constitutional complaint arguing that the contested provisions, which stipulate disqualification for appointment as a general public official and non-commissioned officer, infringe on his right to hold public office.

The Constitutional Court stated, "The contested provisions permanently restrict the appointment of all general public officials and non-commissioned officers, including duties unrelated to children, and do not recognize any possibility of resolving disqualification even after a long time has passed. Even if a person is sentenced for sexual harassment or other sexual abuse acts against children, the types of crimes and their severity vary, so the legislative purpose can be sufficiently achieved by a less restrictive method that limits appointment for a considerable period considering the blameworthiness and risk of recidivism of individual crimes."

On the other hand, Justices Lee Seon-ae, Lee Eun-ae, and Lee Jong-seok dissented, stating, "Allowing individuals who have committed crimes with high social blameworthiness to perform public official duties that require a high ethical obligation damages public trust in public office and may cause difficulties in smooth public service."

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