Government "Regrets Partial Suspension of Court's Quarantine Pass, Official Position to Be Announced on 17th" ... Aftermath (Comprehensive Report 2)

[Asia Economy reporters Seo So-jeong and Kim Dae-hyun] On the 14th, the court partially suspended the effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccination certificate and negative test confirmation system (quarantine pass), delivering a sudden brake to the government's expansion of the quarantine pass. In particular, the suspension of the quarantine pass's effectiveness for all 17 types of facilities for adolescents aged 12 to 18 is expected to cause aftershocks. With six administrative lawsuits related to the quarantine pass already underway and four constitutional complaints filed, this situation could have a cascading impact. The government expressed regret over the court's decision and plans to announce an official stance on the 17th.

The Ministry of Health and Welfare stated in the afternoon regarding the court's injunction decision on the quarantine pass, "The government regrets the court's judgment," and added, "The government will comprehensively review the court's ruling and the quarantine situation, and after discussion at the Central Disaster and Safety Countermeasures Headquarters meeting on the 17th, will provide an official position."

◆Government: "Quarantine pass effectiveness is clear" vs Court: "Restrictions are excessive"= Son Young-rae, head of the Social Strategy Division at the Central Disaster and Safety Countermeasures Headquarters, said on a radio broadcast immediately after the court's decision, "The public interest of the quarantine pass itself is recognized, but the court judged that applying the quarantine pass to department stores and large marts in Seoul is excessive," adding, "Regarding adolescents aged 12 to 18, the necessity of these public interests seems somewhat lower, so the court accepted the injunction for these two."

Son said, "The quarantine pass is a quarantine measure to block infections among the unvaccinated and their transmission, thereby reducing the overall scale of the outbreak and preserving the medical system to shorten social distancing," and added, "With the current outbreak, the policy of expanding the quarantine pass has reduced confirmed cases. Although it is understandable as it was the first expansion, the court seems to think there are excessive parts."

However, the government expressed regret over the court's decision and repeatedly emphasized the necessity of the quarantine pass, given its sufficient effectiveness during the COVID-19 pandemic. Son said, "During the outbreak expansion last December, the number of patients rapidly approached nearly 8,000," and added, "Currently, the outbreak is somewhat stabilized, so originally, the quarantine pass was to be lifted first from low-risk facilities, but this court decision has made the situation ambiguous."

The Seoul Administrative Court's Administrative Division 4 (Chief Judge Han Won-gyo) partially accepted the injunction request filed by 1,023 people, including Professor Jo Doo-hyung of Yeungnam University College of Medicine, medical professionals, and religious figures, against the Mayor of Seoul.

As a result of this decision, the effectiveness of the quarantine pass applied to stores, marts, and department stores over 3,000㎡ in Seoul is suspended. Currently, there are about 460 'large-scale stores' over 3,000㎡ under the Distribution Industry Development Act in Seoul. Additionally, the quarantine pass's effectiveness is suspended for all 17 types of facilities for adolescents aged 12 to 18. The quarantine pass for those aged 18 and over at other facilities such as PC rooms, restaurants, cafes, movie theaters, and sports stadiums remains in effect as before.

◆Effectiveness suspension only in Seoul raises fairness controversy= The court stated in its ruling, "It is difficult to see a reasonable basis for restricting adolescents aged 12 to 18, who have a significantly low rate of severe illness and no death cases from COVID-19, as subjects of the quarantine pass," and added, "Moreover, for adolescents, given the unknown long-term effects of vaccine side effects and adverse reactions, it is necessary to guarantee their bodily autonomy to decide on vaccination themselves, which is even more significant compared to adults when considering individual health status and infection risk."

The court continued, "Considering that adolescents in this age group have a significantly low likelihood of progressing to severe illness even if infected with COVID-19, not applying the quarantine pass to them does not appear to cause a serious adverse effect on public welfare, such as an increase in severe COVID-19 cases."

Regarding the government's position that there is no urgent need to suspend effectiveness since the quarantine pass for adolescents aged 12 to 18 is scheduled to be applied from March 1, with a grace period until April 1, the court explained, "To be considered fully vaccinated to enter facilities subject to the quarantine pass at the application time, vaccination must begin about six weeks prior, considering intervals and effectiveness periods, so there is an urgent need to prevent harm even at this point."

Furthermore, the court stated, "While restaurants and cafes have a higher risk of infection due to difficulty wearing masks compared to other multi-use facilities, stores, marts, and department stores can be considered relatively lower risk based on usage patterns," and added, "Seoul's blanket application of the quarantine pass to stores, marts, and department stores over 3,000㎡, which are essential living facilities, thereby restricting unvaccinated individuals' access, constitutes an excessive restriction."

Notably, this decision is limited to Seoul's announcement and does not apply to other regions, which is expected to spark fairness debates. The suspension period lasts until 30 days after the first trial ruling in the related main lawsuit is issued.