"I Can Defend a Sexual Assault Perpetrator... But Shocked by That Content from Jo Su-jin" [Hot Interview]

Interview with Lee Sun-hee, Representative of the Korean Women’s Political Network
"Democratic Party Should Cancel Jo Su-jin's Nomination"
"Defended Sexual Assault Perpetrator with Heartless Advocacy"

The Korean Women’s Political Network (Han-Yeonet) issued an unusually strong critical statement regarding the Democratic Party’s nomination of lawyer Jo Su-jin as the candidate for the National Assembly in Gangbuk-gu Eul, Seoul. Han-Yeonet criticized Jo for having defended multiple suspects in sexual crime cases in the past and for leaving advice on her blog aimed at reducing sentences for sexual crimes, demanding the cancellation of her nomination. Jo issued an apology through the Democratic Party’s Public Relations Office. On the morning of the 21st, we conducted a phone interview with Lee Sun-hee, the representative of Han-Yeonet.

Han-Yeonet strongly pointed out lawyer Jo Su-jin’s history of defending suspects in sexual crime cases.

▲ A lawyer can defend either victims or perpetrators. They can defend sexual crime offenders as well. However, the content of such defense should never involve advising perpetrators on how to evade the law or adopting such methods. After seeing the news report yesterday (the 20th), I was horrified. In addition to what was previously known, new information was revealed. During the defense of the perpetrator who sexually assaulted a 10-year-old girl and caused her to contract a sexually transmitted disease, it was mentioned that “the child’s sexually transmitted disease may have been contracted not from the perpetrator but from a third party, including the victim child’s father.” I consider the perpetrator in this case to be a person without conscience, and I also believe that causing secondary harm to the family in this way is an equally conscienceless form of defense.

Candidate Jo Su-jin (third from the left) is taking a commemorative photo at the launch ceremony of the Democratic Party of Korea Seoul Metropolitan Election Countermeasures Committee held at the National Assembly on the 20th.
[Image source=Yonhap News]

The Democratic Party canceled the nomination of former lawmaker Jeong Bong-ju and designated Gangbuk-gu Eul in Seoul as a strategic electoral district, through which Jo Su-jin became the candidate via a primary. Do you see the mere participation of Jo in the primary as problematic?

▲ Yes. (Jo Su-jin) is currently a director of the Roh Moo-hyun Foundation, and when the former chairman of the Roh Moo-hyun Foundation said, “I just picked up the badge on the street,” it felt like everyone was confessing to their own faults. The Democratic Party decided the candidate for Gangbuk-gu Eul through a “strategic nomination,” but if the party’s strategy is not anti-human rights or anti-women against public sentiment, Jo Su-jin’s nomination should be immediately canceled.

Jo Su-jin apologized by saying she would “be reborn as a public servant for the people.” What do you think about this?

▲ It seems she apologized as a way to avoid the storm. In her apology, she said that “taking on the defense of sexual offenders and promoting it on her blog were activities in compliance with the lawyer’s ethical standards.” The problem is not that she defended sexual offenders, but how she defended them. As I mentioned earlier, is it ethical for a lawyer to cause secondary harm to victims and their families through their defense? And looking at what she promoted on her blog, it was literally content that lured sexual violence perpetrators as clients. Saying that such issues were activities in compliance with ethical standards shows she still does not recognize her wrongdoing.

Moreover, she said she would “take law aside from justice and the people’s perspective as the measure of value.” Are law and justice different? I believe law exists for justice, so how can a lawyer who views law and justice as different dimensions become a legislator responsible for the people? She even added that she would “be reborn as a public servant for the people,” but I cannot help but laugh at this part. Does this mean that Minbyun (the Lawyers for a Democratic Society) was not a legal organization for the people? She boasted about being the secretary-general of Minbyun, but if such a lawyer places being a lawyer below being a public servant for the people, I wonder how she views the efforts of her colleagues and junior lawyers who represent justice and the lives of the people in the legal field.

A citizen is signing at the sexual harassment-related petition event hosted by the Korean Women’s Political Network. / Photo by Korean Women’s Political Network

Jo Su-jin received a 25% female bonus in the strategic primary process. Do you think this was appropriate?

▲ The female candidate bonus should be given to women who have lived diligently in real life and are qualified as lawmakers. It should not be used as a means to give 25% to women who are anti-women and cause secondary harm to children. I am also one of the people who helped create the gender quota system through amendments to the Political Parties Act in Korea. Therefore, I feel severe discomfort and self-disgust when the system is used and exploited merely because someone is biologically female as a defensive shield.

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