Child Abuse Punishment Act Article 35, Prohibition of Reports Identifying Perpetrators
Constitutional Court: "High Possibility of Secondary Harm... Uniform Reporting Ban Is Inevitable"
Chief Justice Yoo Nam-seok of the Constitutional Court, along with other constitutional justices, entered and took their seats in the Grand Bench of the Constitutional Court in Jongno-gu, Seoul, on the afternoon of the 27th. [Image source=Yonhap News]
[Asia Economy Reporter Heo Kyung-jun] The Constitutional Court has ruled that the legal provision prohibiting media outlets from reporting personal information or photos that can identify perpetrators of child abuse does not violate the Constitution.
On the 27th, the Constitutional Court issued a unanimous decision upholding the constitutionality of Article 35, Paragraph 2 of the Child Abuse Punishment Act in a constitutional review case.
In 2019, a broadcasting company reported the name, face photo, career, and location of the incident of a child abuse perpetrator who was a sports instructor. Subsequently, the reporters and related personnel involved in the coverage were prosecuted for violating the reporting prohibition under the Child Abuse Punishment Act. The Seoul Western District Court, which handled the trial, raised a constitutional review request to the Constitutional Court, arguing that the punishment provision was unconstitutional.
The Constitutional Court judged, "Since most perpetrators of child abuse have close relationships with the victim children, reporting personal information that can identify the perpetrator is highly likely to lead to secondary harm to the victim children."
It added, "Allowing the publication of identifying information about child abuse perpetrators may cause victim children, who fear being publicly known as victims of abuse crimes, to voluntarily refrain from giving statements or reporting. Therefore, there is an unavoidable aspect to the uniform prohibition."
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
