Foreign Workers Protest and are ousted as Terrorist Groups??? The foreign workers have been a problem. On one hand, the ROK needs their cheap labor to do the 3D work -- dirty, dangerous and demeaning. On the other, the ROK does not want them to make trouble. The illegal aliens joined with ROK labor unions in their protests as well. But the inequality in wages and working conditions remained. Korea attempted in the past to "legalize" the illegal workers in hiding, but their efforts failed as the illegal aliens did not trust the ROK to keep its word. Protests over workers being deported after overstaying in the country brought about protests. (See Base 21 or Migrant Workers Union for the migrant worker struggle.)

In October, the ROK started to use the excuse of terrorists to oust illegal aliens who had formed associations to protest the conditions and wages for foreign workers. The ROK considered these associations as trouble-makers. In Oct a supposed Al-Qaida group claimed to have a "base in Seoul" and gave Korea two weeks to pull out of Iraq. The ROK then took action to deport these association members using the terrorist scare as the excuse. In Oct three Bangladeshi workers were deported and supposedly 50 other members fled.

“Gov't Security Measures to Target Illegal Aliens: Lawmaker" SEOUL, Oct. 3 (Yonhap) -- The government has compiled comprehensive measures to deal with the increasing number of illegal foreign residents involving in anti-South Korean activities, a lawmaker said Sunday. The Justice Ministry established measures in April on anti-government activities by illegal immigrants, specifying the scope of anti-government activities and the legal grounds for and levels of punishment to be applied to those engaged in such activities, Rep. Kim Jae-gyeong of the main opposition Grand National Party said.”

Another Yonhap News blurp stated, "According to the article, migrant workers asking for more wage can be ok, but since their demands include political issues such as overthrowing the government, stopping troop dispatch to Iraq, they must be rooted out."

Foreign workers protest loss of pension contributions

The national pension system is generating strong protests from some foreign workers here, who are forced to pay into the pension plan, but will never be able to get the funds back.

The pension contributions are withheld from the workers' pay and deposited with the pension system, matched by contributions from their employers. The workers are often told that they can get the contributions back in a lump sum when they leave Korea. At that time, however, the pension system often refuses to repay them. The problem is one of the single biggest sources of complaints brought to the Seoul Help Center for Foreigners, staff there say.

The issue has even attracted the attention of the National Assembly.

"Requiring foreigners to register for the national pension system without guaranteeing them refunds is taking advantage of poor foreign workers," Rep. Kim Choon-jin of the ruling Uri Party said in a hearing earlier this month.

It isn't just poor workers who are affected, however. By policy, the pension system makes lump-sum reimbursements to workers from just 16 countries - which have either signed bilateral agreements with Korea or mandate reciprocal treatment of pension or social-security contributions in both countries. Those countries include the U.S., Canada, Germany, Hong Kong, and Switzerland.

Foreign workers from 82 other countries, however, including Australia, Britain, China, India, and the Philippines, are refused the return of their contributions because their countries and Korea have not formalized any such agreement.

Nonetheless, workers from the 82 countries often are told by employers - who may be unfamiliar with the distinctions between countries - that they can get their money back when they leave Korea.

"They have to pay the national funds regardless of whether they want to, and later when they find they can't get refunds, they think the money got embezzled," says Yoo Jin-young, assistant manager at the Seoul Help Center for Foreigners.

A Chinese who sought the center's help had had almost 10 million won deducted from his pay for pension contributions while working in Korea as a software engineer at an LG affiliate, Yoo says.

After spending five years here, the man decided to move to Canada. He expected to receive a lump-sum payout of his contributions, but couldn't get the money because of his nationality. He even showed Yoo his receipt for the contributions. "He made ceaseless efforts to get even just part of the money back, but failed," said Yoo.

Many of the foreigners don't know that they are ineligible for lump sum payments of the contributions, Yoo said. "The more serious problem lies in that foreigners do not expect that fact (that they cannot get refunds), and they are informed by their employers that they can get them when they leave Korea," Yoo said.

Officials of the pension plan say the government cannot give a one-way refund to someone from another country while the government of that country rakes in social-security payments from Koreans who work there. "There are Koreans abroad who have to pay social-security contributions. If we start to resolve individual claims by giving the money back, the person might be happy, but it would be detrimental to Korea," said Kim Ha-young of the of the National Pension Corporation's International Cooperation Team.

Because rules of reciprocity are applied to the pension system, people from 15 countries such as Nepal and Russia, which don't require pension contributions from foreign workers, do not have to make pension contributions in Korea at all.

As of June 30, accumulated contributions that by policy could not be refunded to foreign workers totaled nearly 22 billion won ($19 million), lawmaker Kim told the National Assembly. Officials say the funds are held for payment of obligations to other pension-plan members.

Pension plan officials add, however, that the plan still has value even for the workers who can't recover their contributions, because the plan provides coverage in case of disability or death while in Korea. The plan has paid out more for such claims than the accumulated funds that haven't been refunded, they say.

For both Korean and foreign workers, pension contributions amount to 9 percent of their pay. Of the total 9 percent, 4.5 percent is withheld from the worker's earnings. The remainder is contributed by the employer. Under certain conditions, Korean citizens also can get lump-sum repayment of their contributions to the pension plan, such as if they are leaving Korea permanently before qualifying for payment of a pension. If someone dies before qualifying for a pension, a lump-sum payment goes to his or her survivors.

Johnson Philips, an Indian citizen who worked in what are called "3D" (dirty, dangerous, or difficult) jobs" in Korea, said he was "shocked" to hear that he could not get his pension contributions back when he planned to leave Korea after working here for four years.

"I was informed they shall be returned when I finally go back to my country," Philips said in a letter to the Seoul Help Center for Foreigners.

He said it was unjust for the government to require the contributions even from low-paid laborers, and not repay the funds to them.

The authorities say that the best thing that can be done is to resolve the issue through negotiations with other countries. "A bilateral agreement should be implemented first," the pension plan's Kim said. "That cannot be done just by words. It may take years in some cases."

Agreements with Japan and France will take effect next year, he said. "Given that the national pension system started in 1988, the progress of the negotiations is remarkable," he asserted. By comparison, Japan has only two countries that it has agreements with, he said.

For more information about the Korean pension system, see the Web site of the National Pension Corporation at http://www.npc.or.kr/eng/g_index.html.

National Security Law Collision The GNP party was poised to boycott the legislation to bring about a face-to-face showdown over the Uri Party's competency. The Uri party, which gained a majority in the National Assembly in the April 15 parliamentary elections, has failed to show its leadership so far, and the legislative move will act as a double-edged sword for the embattled party. It can be an opportunity for the Uri Party to recover its reformative image, but it may further lose its support base if it backtracks on the reform measures.

The Uri Party has less than two months to push through the bills, which call for abolition of an anti-communist law, a painstaking review of modern history, regulation of the media and reform of private schools. The ongoing regular session of the Assembly ends on Dec. 9, and the proposed bills will automatically be scrapped if they fail to receive parliamentary approval before the deadline. The Uri Party, which plans to submit the bills to the Assembly by Oct. 20, has ratcheted up the pressure on the main opposition party.

At the center of the deepening political bickering is a far-reaching law that bans South Koreans from having contact or sympathizing with North Korea. The Uri Party has decided to scrap the NSL, which was often used by former authoritarian leaders as a tool to suppress dissidents. The Uri party aimed to revise the criminal code to take the place of the NSL coverage for crimes of espionage and rebellion by illegal organizations with the aim of overthrowing the government.

The GNP, backed by conservatives, has strongly opposed the proposal, claiming it will make applying the law more complex. The GNP position is that scrapping of the National Security Law is a renunciation of the minimum mechanism for protecting the country from threats by North Korea. The National Security Law, established in 1948, regards North Korea as illegally occupying South Korea's territory, and does not acknowledge it as a country. GNP lawmakers argue that the Uri Party's actions will lead to the legalization of communist forces in the country. Appealing to the Constitutional Court would be one of GNP's final cards. Under the law, one can appeal to the Constitutional Court when a statute harms, or has a possibility of harming citizens' rights by contravening what is stated in the nation's constitution. Therefore, if the bill to repeal the security law is passed, the GNP can appeal to the court, reasoning that it would endanger national security and harm people's rights.

The Prosecutor's office refused to make a direct comment on the issue, saying it would be inappropriate for the judicial branch office to evaluate a legislative process. However, prosecutors raised concerns over an inevitable security breach, saying the revision will not allow prosecution of those "clearly" working or even spying for the communist North as long as their activities are not aimed at causing domestic violence. The revision will supposedly strengthen the criminal code but limit prosecution to those trying to cause domestic conflict or civil war. There will be no way to prosecute those working for North Korea or pro-Pyongyang organizations as long as their activities are not directly aimed at causing a civil war. Prosecutor general Song Kwang-soo claimed that the ruling party did not ask for his input on the issue of the repeal of the National Security Law. As for the question of whether the National Security Law infringes upon human rights, Song said that there may have been cases of human rights abuses in the past, but he does not believe there has been one since the Kim Young-sam administration.

Popular support seems to be split with nearly half of the South Korean people feeling the NSL need to be revised -- but not abolished. A survey conducted on Tuesday by a local radio station showed that nearly half, or 48.3 percent, of 1,003 people polled want to retain the National Security Law with only minor revisions, while another 13.9 percent said they wanted see the law kept intact. Another survey of 926 people 20 years and older, also conducted on Tuesday by one of South Korea's major dailies, JoongAng Ilbo, revealed that 98 percent of the surveyed believe those who provide hideouts to North Korean spies in return for money must be punished. The GNP is quoting 80 percent as the number that want the NSL to remain -- though revised.

On 23 Oct more than 2,000 people, including civic activists, held a demonstration calling for the abolishment of South Korea's anti-communist National Security Law in Seoul. The demonstrators released a statement during a rally at Gwangwhamun and Jongno in downtown Seoul, saying "As the reactionary forces try to return to the past age of barbarism, let's put an end to the National Security Law to bring in the age of human rights and peaceful reunification." The protests also included events such as singing and dancing.

Capital Relocation Law Declared Unconstitutional The Roh plan for the capital relocation is in deep trouble as it has been revealed that the costs may quadruple. The Roh government chose Yeongi-Gongju in central South Korea as the final candidate site. Seoul City government has rallied support for protests in rallies throughout Seoul and petition drives. Other NGO civic groups have arisen also to voice the concern and filed legal action to block the move but the case was thrown out. The Uri party took legal action to attempt to silence the groups. A total of 169 people, including members of the Seoul municipal assembly, professors and business owners, put forth the petition back on July to challenge the capital relocation bill, saying that it infringes on their rights to vote and participate in government affairs on 12 Jul. The problem was that the capital relocation was now looking like something that the ROK can not afford the $39.4 billion project -- which opponents claimed would quadruple in reality. There is NOT enough money to go around with all the other projects on Korea's plate. It was swiftly becoming a white elephant -- but a lot of money was being wasted making plans and land speculation was rampant.

The Constitutional Court gave its final verdict on 21 Oct with the nine judge panel's 8-to-1 ruling that the bill was unconstitutional. The decision was televised live nationwide. The Constitutional Court recommended a national referendum for the enforcement of a special bill on capital relocation, putting the brake on the government's bid to move the nation's administrative capital out of Seoul. Justice Kim Yung-il voiced an opinion that the government's special law authorizing the relocation had also violated Article 72 of the constitution, which requires a national referendum on an important policy decision directly linked to national security. The one dissenting justice, Jeon Hyo-sook, sided with the government, saying that no constitutional amendment or national referendum was required. Ms. Jeon is the only justice appointed to the court by the Roh administration.

The bench said in its ruling that the government must amend the constitution before it can support the government's capital relocation plan. Before it can do this, however, the government must first hold a national referendum on the amendment. The court said that the government violated the constitution by failing to hold a national referendum on whether the public would accept the government chosen region in Chungcheong Province as the new capital of Korea. Revisions to the constitution must first be proposed by either the president or a majority of parliament. The National Assembly must then pass the revision bill with the support of two-thirds of sitting representatives. The public must finally approve the revision bill by a majority vote in a national referendum held within 30 days of the National Assembly's passage. The current capital relocation plan is not expected to move ahead, considering the distribution of seats in the National Assembly and public opinion polls that show a majority of the peope are against relocation.

Speculators drove land prices up in the Yeongi-Gongju area and prices doubled and tripled in recent months following news the area had been selected as the site for a new capital. After the Constitutional Court ruling, the bottom fell out of the market. Most of the speculators were from the Seoul area.

Roh has based his whole presidency on the fulfillment of this "vision." Our objection to this "vision" is that Roh went about it without asking the people in a referendum what they wanted. We stated this when it was first proposed and shook our head in disbelief in the underhanded way that the Roh government went about bypassing a national consensus on something of such importance. He based his actions on the "referendum" of the ballot box whereby the mindless masses would accept his vision. There are many who do not share his view -- and now that the costs are being revealed, there are more and more voicing their discontent throughout the country. Roh, however, has backed himself into a corner on this issue. The decision was a serious blow to the Roh government. Roh has said he will risk the fate of his administration to build a new capital. He regarded opposition to the project as a campaign to oust him.

KBS released the results of the nationwide poll, taken among 1,003 people aged over 20 several hours after the 21 Oct ruling. More than 60 percent of South Koreans support the Constitutional Court's decision to block President Roh Moo-hyun's plan to relocate the country's capital.

Residents of South Chungcheong Province, the region proposed by the government for the location of the country's new administrative capital, took to the streets on 22 Oct in protest against the Constitutional Court's nullification of a law promoting the project. Demonstrations were organized in Daejeon and its surrounding South Chungcheong Province. Some members of civic groups in the region blamed the opposition Grand National Party (GNP) for what they said was political exploitation of the issue against the President Roh Moo-hyun and the ruling party. The main opposition party, which approved the special law in December last year when the National Assembly passed it, changed its position to oppose it in the face of opposition from conservative groups in Seoul, part of the party's political base. "The GNP not only discarded its responsibility for the law it helped to make but also turned against the law as a political tactic," a coalition of civic groups in Daejeon said in a statement issued during the rally.

Banks, which had provided a huge amount of money in project financing to real estate development projects in the Chungcheong region, faced an emergency situation. Since the first half of 2003, banks had injected W500 billion into real estate development projects like apartments and office buildings in the proposed capital region and neighboring areas. Project financing meant lending money to developers in line with the prospects of particular projects such as social infrastructure and real estate development. According to material from 16 financial institutions, financial institutions like banks and the National Agricultural Cooperative had invested W514.4 billion in developing real estate in the new capital site and neighboring regions since 2003. The figure amounted to 8.8 percent of the nation's total real estate development spending of W5.8 trillion during the same period. Construction companies had already spent the money on purchasing land.

NOVEMBER 2004:

Labor unrest (14 Nov) and Government Workers Strike (15 Nov 2004) Tens of thousands of labor union members took to the streets in central Seoul on 14 Nov in protest at a government-proposed law seeking to allow an increase in the number of the country's temporary workers. About 9,000 riot police surrounded the Gwanghwamun intersection as the protesters chanted accusations against the government of undermining the basic rights of workers. The protest turned violent as the protestors turned on the riot police. Labor unrest was expected to escalate, as the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions (KCTU) said 14 Nov that it decided to walk out in opposition to a government-proposed law on temporary workers. The umbrella organization of labor unions, claiming 620,000 members across the country, said the strike will start immediately after the government-proposed motion on temporary workers is presented to the National Assembly.

Labor Protests on 13 Nov

The Korean Government Employees Union (KGEU) called for a general strike as the KGEU feels that it should be given the right of collective bargaining, but the government maintains that it is illegal. The unionists were joined by the more radical student elements. On 14 Nov a rally was held at Yonsei University, but because the Police issued warrants the rally moved to Hanyang University. The KGEU went on strike on 15 Nov and immediately the government started to round up the union leaders. The Union went on a strike to protest the government’s policy towards civil servants’ labor rights. The "illegal" union has been calling on the government to revise pending legislation which will let public servants form unions and bargain collectively, but bans strikes. However, a minimal impact on public services was seen thanks to union members’ limited participation. The Ministry of Home Affairs revealed around 3,300 union members did not show up at work and participated in the strike. A total of 1,069 came back to work before noon. Due to its earlier threat to dismiss every striking public worker, the ministry requested local governments to punish all 3,300 union members, including the 1,069 who later came back to work.

University Rally on 14 Nov

The police arrested 12 out of 47 leading members with warrants for their arrest. The police also arrested 150 union members at 15 sites across the nation, treating them as criminals taken in an act of crime. The Public Security Department of the Supreme Public Prosecutors’ Office on Monday decided to indict the public workers who showed minimal participation in the walkout and deal with every civil servant as criminal cases who was arrested at the scene or who had charges filed against them by the local government.

Farmers Protest WTO Rice Opening On 13 Nov some 11,000 South Korean farmers marched through downtown Seoul on Saturday in a rally opposing the government's negotiations on the liberalization of the country's rice market. Accusing the government of engaging in the talks on opening up the market without the public's consent, the protesters held a sit-down rally outside Seoul Station.

On 14 Nov according to Reuters, "About 5,000 South Korean farmers fought running battles with police in the streets of Seoul on Saturday during a protest against a government plan to further ease rice imports. They threw stones and bottles at police who used water cannons and bamboo sticks to hold them off along barricaded streets in the heart of the capital."

Farmer Protests on 14 Nov

This is a continuation of the protests the farmers waged during the summer. South Korea, facing a deadline to ease rice import restrictions, said it had almost completed talks with exporting nations including the United States, China, Thailand, Australia and Canada, enraging farmers. The farmers have frequently held protests to oppose imports of foreign rice, which is one quarter the price of locally grown grain. They want a referendum before any change in import policy, but the government has rejected the proposal. Under concessions made in the World Trade Organisation's (WTO) Uruguay Round of world trade talks, Seoul has an annual rice import quota set at a maximum of 228,031 tonnes this year. Imports from next year will almost certainly rise above a current cap of four percent of local consumption as a 10-year grace period for quotas expires this year.

On 19 Nov farmers’ groups held a rally at Seoul City Hall Plaza on Friday to call for the protection of the Korean rice market and reform of the National Agricultural Cooperative Federation (NACF). An estimated 15,000 farmers from across the county joined the rally, after which they clashed with police in an attempt to march toward Cheong Wa Dae and the NACF headquarters. In a resolution, the farmers called for the government to extend the moratorium on rice tariffication; ban additional liberalization of the rice market and sale of imported rice; legalize self-supporting food policy; maintain the government’s system of purchasing harvest grain; strengthen the target income support system and direct payment system; revise the agricultural cooperatives law within the year; push for a comprehensive reform of the NACF; and resolve farmers’ debts. On 20 Nov approximately 14,000 farmers faced off against 6,000 riot police as they marched through Seoul towards the Seoul Train Station. When the march veered towards the Blue House, the riot police intervened and violence broke out. According to the Chosun Ilbo on 20 Nov:

Korea Advanced Farmers Federation (KAFF) President Seo Jeong-eui said in an opening address that farmers could not help but to denounce the Roh Moo-hyun government for claming it was inevitable to allow imported rice to be sold on the market without resolving farmers’ extreme debts. He demanded the government immediately come up with special measures to deal with problems and protect the farmers’ rights and interests.

The farmers wore headbands inscribed with “No Additional Rice Market Opening,” “Defend Sovereignty over Food,” and “Revise the Agricultural Cooperatives Law,” and there were many banners hung where the rally was held. One of the banner read, “Indiscriminate Liberalization of the Agricultural Market Kills All Farmers.”

A 35-year-old farmer, Jung Sung-tae, said that since the early 1990s, when the Uruguay Round started, the government had lied to farmers that it would not abandon them. He added that feeling desperate, farmers gathered from all over the country to denounce the government for failing to reform the agricultural structure.

After the rally, farmers clashed with the police who used water cannons to stop them from marching toward Cheong Wa Dae and NACF headquarters. Originally, the farmers had planned to march to Seoul Station. Some 6,000 policemen were stationed around where the rally took place to control the rally and search rally participants to check whether they carried alcohol.

NOTICE/DISCLAIMER: The content of this page is UNOFFICIAL and the views and opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect those of anyone associated with this page or any of those linked from this site. All opinions are those of the writer and are intended for entertainment purposes only. Links to other web pages are provided for convenience and do not, in any way, constitute an endorsement of the linked pages or any commercial or private issues or products presented there. Neither the DOD, the Air Force, the 8th Fighter Wing nor Mickey Mouse has endorsed any of this site. All Air Force links are publicly accessible through the worldwide web. If there is any discrepancy between eye-witness accounts and OFFICIAL DOD records, this site opts to lend credence to the eye-witness views.

Return to Top

Weekly