By Andy Jackson

The handful of bleary-eyed young riot policemen on hand early Wednesday morning at Deoksu Palace were treated to a strange sight.

At 5:30 a.m., a group of about 50 mostly older men dressed in black or military uniforms rushed toward a gaggle of plastic tents that housed a makeshift alter to former President Roh Moo-hyun. They quickly dismantled the tents and made off with a large picture of the Roh. The raid was over in minutes.

The 10 Roh supporters at the site were sleeping and did not have a chance to react to the raid. The 60 or so riot policemen, whose duty was to protect Deoksu Palace, also failed to intervene. Local officials later removed the remains of the altar, but only after scuffles with Roh supporters angered by the raid and the removal.

If the police had gotten involved, it is hard to know whose side they would have taken. Both the raid and the plastic altar were illegal.

How did things come to a point where a group of political activists operates outside the law with impunity unless they are confronted by another group of political activists acting illegally?

The answer to that question touches on a deficit of democracy that Korea is suffering.

While there are many definitions of democracy, two things that are broadly agreed upon are the principles of majority rule and minority rights. In other words, electoral victors have the right to set policies and to expect loyalty from the opposition. In return, the opposition has the right, among other things, to freely express their views and to become the majority at a later date if they can convince the public that their views are correct.

Right now Korea is witness to a lack of adherence to both principles.

Government officials under the Lee administration have been too ready to use prosecution as the weapon of choice against speech they consider to be untruthful or damaging to the Korean economy.

The case of ``Minerva," the Internet name of ``economist" blogger Park Dae-sung, was a particularly embarrassing example of government eagerness to suppress dissenting views. He was arrested last January on charges of spreading information that damaged the livelihoods of Koreans only to be acquitted in April.

As if that lesson were not enough, the government is making the exact same mistake in the current prosecution of PD Notebook, an MBC television journal whose sensationalist and false reporting led to massive protests against the Lee government and American beef last year.

The proper response to such instances is exposure of the facts and perhaps a healthy dose of reticule. PD Notebook was forced to make an on-air retraction, which helped put an end to the anti-beef protests.

Of course, attempts to suppress political opponents, even under democratically elected governments, are nothing new. The Kim Dae-jung administration made a habit of using state power to go after opponents in the media, especially the ``big three" conservative newspapers; the Chosun, JoongAng and Dong-A dailies.

Then there is the matter of restrictions on protests. While all Koreans have the right to organize demonstrations, it has been sometimes difficult for groups to get the necessary permits. When they proceed with their protests sans permits, the police arrest them on charges of holding unlawful rallies.

For their part, protesters are often not content with just letting their views be known, but seek to disrupt the lives of citizens and instigate conflicts with the police. Local business suffered during the beef protests last year as protesters continuously disrupted citizens' freedom of movement and cut off business from their customers.

Protesters also confronted police officers and vandalized public property in an attempt to goad the police into a violent response (and succeeded as often as not) in the hope of turning public opinion against the government. A total of 170 police buses were damaged and numerous police officers had to receive medical treatment as a result of those actions.

Such tactics are more reminiscent of insurgencies than legitimate political expression. While those methods may have a place when confronting a dictatorship, they do not in a system featuring regular free elections.

The rule of the streets is no substitute for the rule of the electorate and the rule of law.

Back to the Roh altar; the local government should have helped those manning the altar keep it legally in an appropriate location and the Roh mourners should have accepted that they can not keep the altar on a busy sidewalk in the middle of one of the busiest areas in Seoul and that they should follow the proper procedures. All that was needed from both sides was a little give and take.

Both the government and its detractors could use a refresher course in democracy 101.

Andy Jackson has taught courses on American government and has been writing on Korean politics and other issues for four years. He can be reached at andyinrok@lycos.com.