[Comprehensive] "Abolish the Abortion Law Completely" National Assembly Petition Reaches 100,000 Signatures... Referred to Standing Committee

[Asia Economy Reporter Kim Bong-ju] A national petition demanding the complete abolition of the abortion law has garnered 100,000 signatures, prompting a review by the relevant standing committees.

On the 3rd, the National Assembly announced through the National Assembly National Petition website that "the petition concerning the complete abolition of the abortion law and the guarantee of women's reproductive rights has received 100,000 signatures as of 7:49 AM on November 3, 2020, and has been referred to the Health and Welfare Committee as the relevant committee, as well as the related committees: the Legislation and Judiciary Committee and the Administration and Security Committee."

The National Assembly National Petition system officially accepts bills registered by citizens who have obtained 100,000 signatures within 30 days for parliamentary review, and this system has been in effect since January of this year.

The petition was posted on the 5th of last month and reached the required 100,000 signatures with one day remaining before the petition deadline.

The petitioner stated, "The Constitutional Court ruled the abortion law unconstitutional and set December 31, 2020, as the deadline for legal revision, but the government has only engaged in meaningless discussions about pregnancy duration," adding, "The abortion law threatens not only women's bodily sovereignty but also their health rights and economically oppresses women."

He demanded that "the National Assembly completely abolish the abortion law without any gestational limits and establish a basic legal foundation to guarantee women's reproductive rights," and requested that the law use terms such as 'women' and 'pregnancy termination or interruption' instead of 'maternity' and 'abortion.'

Additionally, he proposed strengthening penalties for sellers of counterfeit contraceptives, approving the import of pregnancy termination-inducing drugs, and including pregnancy termination surgeries within the scope of national health insurance coverage.

The petitioner also pointed out, "South Korea still does not import 'Mifepristone,' an abortion-inducing drug whose efficacy and safety have been verified by the World Health Organization (WHO)," and criticized that "pregnancy termination procedures performed in Korea are outdated, primarily using curettage, which carries the risk of uterine perforation."

He further noted, "In this situation, illegal and counterfeit drug trades are rampant, and medical professionals are not properly trained in pregnancy termination procedures."

The petitioner also highlighted the economic burden caused by abortion. He reported, "The cost of clandestine pregnancy termination surgeries ranged widely, with 41.7% costing less than 300,000 to 500,000 KRW and 32.1% costing between 500,000 to 1,000,000 KRW, reflecting a reality where prices were arbitrarily set."

The debate over the abortion law has continued for 66 years since the law was enacted in 1953. Support and opposition to the abortion law have been divided based on whether priority is given to the fetus's right to life or the woman's right to self-determination regarding pregnancy and childbirth timing.

However, on April 11 of last year, the Constitutional Court intensified the debate by ruling the abortion law unconstitutional, stating it infringes on women's right to self-determination. While acknowledging its unconstitutionality, the court decided to maintain the current law until alternative legislation is prepared to prevent social confusion. The court ordered the National Assembly to revise the abortion law (Maternal and Child Health Act) by December 31, 2020. If no revision is made, the law must be completely abolished.

Since then, the National Assembly and government have been sluggish in conducting related discussions, and only on October 7 of this year did they announce a draft amendment to the Criminal Act that maintains the abortion law but allows unconditional abortion within 14 weeks of pregnancy.

This reignited the abortion law debate, with the medical community (obstetrics and gynecology organizations), women's groups, and religious circles opposing the government proposal for different reasons.

First, the medical community criticized the government's setting of the 'allowed range' for free pregnancy termination. While the government allowed unrestricted abortion within 14 weeks, the medical community argued it should be reduced to within 10 weeks for maternal safety. Since after 10 weeks of pregnancy, the fetus's organs and bones are considerably formed, abortion procedures after 10 weeks may cause infertility, miscarriage, or premature birth in the mother later, posing risks.

Religious groups have voiced support for maintaining the 'abortion law.' They argue from the religious value of respecting life that the fetus should be regarded as a living being. Citing exceptions in the Maternal and Child Health Act that allow abortion in cases of genetic problems, sexual assault, or the pregnant woman's health, they claim, "Punishing abortion cannot be seen as an excessive restriction on the pregnant woman's right to self-determination," and express concern that "if abortion is not penalized, it will become rampant."

On the other hand, women's groups are demanding the complete abolition of the abortion law. They argue that "the abortion law infringes on women's right to self-determination." They claim that forcing women to continue unwanted pregnancies and childbirth harms their biological and mental health. Women's groups also emphasize that since abortion law penalties are rarely enforced, maintaining the abortion law cannot serve as a means to protect the fetus or women's bodies.

© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.