Winter Edition 2012

Newsletter: Winter Edition 2012

Chemical Castration on Pedophiles in South Korea

Protection against sexual assault versus human rights violation

On 3rd January 2013, Pyo, who has raped five teenagers between November 2011 and May 2012, was ordered by the court in South Korea to receive chemical castration. The forced medication was intended to suppress his excessive sexual desires and prevent him from repeating his acts. While chemical castration is legal in South Korea and adopted in some other countries such as Australia and Russia, controversies arise as effectiveness of chemical castration is questionable and suspicion of violating the human rights of sex offenders.

Chemical Castration in South Korea
Chemical castration is different from physical castration as its sexual suppression effect is temporary during the medication period instead of a permanent surgical removal of sexual organs. The medication suppresses testosterone production and shuts down the sex drive. Legislation in South Korea allows forced chemical castration on sex offenders over the age of 19, who have sexually offended against children under the age of 16 and are diagnosed with pedophilia. This so called medical treatment on sex offenders can last up to 15 years and is anticipated to create deterrence effect on rapists. President Lee Myung-bak considered chemical castration as a measure to combat a crime that could only have been perpetrated by a man with the mind of a beast. While chemical castration may reach a deterrence or punitive effect, I would argue that (i) it is not an effective means to solve the problem and (ii) may infringe a persons human rights and dignity.

Effectiveness
Chemical castration is not effective in solving the problem of sexual assault in the long run. Firstly, chemical castration is only effective during the medication period. According to Dr. Shin Eui-jin of Yonsei Severance Hospital, research shows that medication is effective only on 7-12 % of the sex assaulters. Once the medication is over, they are likely to commit sex crimes again with a weaker sense of self control. Cost is also high for such a treatment. The Korean government expects 900 million won budget for 100 people taking the injection per year. Secondly, forced chemical castration fails to reach an education effect. Unlike a voluntary chemical castration in which sex assaulters apply for medication themselves to reduce imprisonment time in return, a forced chemical castration only penalizes them without correcting their behavior. Thirdly, many sex assaulters do not have any sexual disorder like pedophilia. They are just antisocial, outrageous and dangerous. Medication is useless on them as it is likely that they will commit the offence again after the treatment.

Human Rights Violation
Chemical castration may also lead to serious human rights infringement. Sex assaulters are trespassed both physically and mentally as they are forced to receive the medical treatment. In addition to the reduction in sexual aggressiveness, there are lots of side effects such as osteoporosis, increased risk of heart diseases, liver damage, or mental illnesses such as depression. The Korean government may have already violated Article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which states that no one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Religious groups in South Korea also oppose forced chemical castration. Kim Duk-jin, director of Catholic Human Rights Committee, commented chemical castration as a punishment made by politicians that appears to be a populist act. Amnesty International also opposes to chemical castration as the treatment violates the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. According to the March statement, forced chemical castration could be a matter-of-course decision. However, it is incompatible with human rights, which are the foundation of any civilized democratic society. Being a civilized, liberal and democratic state, South Korea should ensure that their citizens would be subjected to physical and mental protection.

How to reach a balance?
Article 19 (1) of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child states that, States Parties shall take all appropriate legislative, administrative, social and educational measures to protect the child from all forms of physical or mental violence, injury or abuse, neglect or negligent treatment, maltreatment or exploitation, including sexual abuse, while in the care of parent(s), legal guardian(s) or any other person who has the care of the child. It is true that the South Korean government has the responsibility to protect the children from sexual abuse and reduce the number of sexual assaults in the society. Nevertheless, forced chemical castration infringes fundamental human rights and is ineffective. A voluntary chemical castration for reduction of sentence would be a better alternative. This is being practised in other countries like New Zealand. Offenders would have the incentives to receive treatment. At the same time, the effect is not only punitive as they receive treatment on a voluntary basis. The government should also increase the maximum imprisonment period so as to deter sex crimes.

LEE Ho Ching, Matthew
Current Affairs Secretary
World University Service, HKUB, HKUSU,
Session 2012-2013