Bahk Eun-ji has been with The Korea Times since 2012, building a career across multiple desks. She began at the Business Desk, where she conducted in-depth interviews with key figures in Korea's corporate world. Later, she moved to the Politics & City Desk, focusing on education policy and social affairs. She later served as team leader of the digital content team, leading curation efforts on the newspaper’s homepage and reshaping print stories for social media audiences to enhance digital reach. Now back on the Politics Desk, she covers the National Assembly and the Ministry of National Defense, with a renewed focus on political developments.
Liberal bloc's push to repeal National Security Law ignites political firestorm
Participants chant slogans during a rally in front of the National Assembly in Yeouido, Seoul, Dec. 1, calling for the abolition of the National Security Act. Yonhap
By Bahk Eun-ji
North Korean threat casts shadow over push to scrap contested law
Ruling party lawmakers are facing mounting political backlash after 31 members of the broader pro-government bloc introduced a bill to abolish the National Security Act (NSA), reigniting a decadeslong debate over how South Korea should balance civil liberties with national security.
Supporters of the bill describe the NSA, enacted in 1948 to penalize individuals for "praising, encouraging, disseminating or cooperating" with North Korea, as an outdated instrument that has enabled the state to silence political dissent and unjustly prosecute activists. But opponents argue that eliminating the law would erode South Korea’s capacity to defend itself against espionage.
The proponents of the bill — lawmakers from the Democratic Party of Korea, the Rebuilding Korea Party, the Progressive Party and two smaller groups — argued that the law has “restricted democracy and freedom of expression for 77 years” and that many of its provisions merely duplicate articles in the Criminal Act or other statutes governing inter-Korean relations.
Civic groups have also rallied behind the proposal. At an event marking the NSA’s 77th anniversary on Dec. 1, nearly 1,000 labor and civic organizations called on the National Assembly to end what they described as an “era of repression” and move toward a South Korea “without the National Security Act.” They argued that the law has long been used to justify government overreach during periods of political tension, resulting in a long record of human rights violations.
But the conservative People Power Party (PPP) strongly criticized the bloc for proceeding without a broader consensus. PPP spokespersons said pushing for the repeal “without a social consensus” would provoke strong resistance and stressed that the Constitutional Court has repeatedly upheld the NSA’s constitutionality.
They contend that, with South Korea's security environment still defined by North Korea’s actions, removing a core national security statute would be irresponsible.
The NSA has long been one of Korea’s most controversial laws. Many opponents argue that the law reflects the political climate of the Cold War era and has often been used to silence critics. Supporters, however, say the law still has practical value and that South Korea needs a clear legal basis to address espionage cases.
Yet court records tell a more complicated story.
Almost half of those tried under the act over the past decade were acquitted at their first trial, raising broader questions about the consistency and reliability of its application.
Participants hold placards during a rally organized by National Action to Abolish the National Security Act in front of the National Assembly in Yeouido, Seoul, Dec. 1. Yonhap
Some analysts argue that South Korea no longer needs a separate security statute to prosecute espionage-related crimes. Political commentator Lee Jong-hoon noted that major national security offenses already exist in the Criminal Act, suggesting that lawmakers “could strengthen those provisions rather than preserve a separate law.” He added that portraying the repeal as creating “a safe zone for spies” is an exaggeration.
Others have drawn attention to specific clauses that have attracted international criticism, including the provision that criminalizes praising or encouraging an anti-state organization. Commentator Kim Su-min said international human-rights bodies have repeatedly identified this clause as incompatible with global free speech norms. Removing it “would be a meaningful step even without the act being fully abolished.”
Still, several experts caution that the current circumstances make an outright repeal politically difficult. Eom Kyeong-young, director of the Zeitgeist Institute and President TV, said public opinion is unlikely to converge while North Korea remains a direct security threat.
“Past liberal administrations didn’t try to repeal the act outright; they simply pulled back on enforcement,” Eom said. “Easing how the law is applied may reduce political friction far more than forcing an all-or-nothing fight over abolishing it.”
Another line of criticism focuses on institutional capacity rather than the legal framework itself.
Political commentator Hwang Tae-soon noted that espionage provisions in South Korea’s Criminal Act would remain in force regardless of the NSA’s fate. But he questioned whether national security agencies — which have undergone substantial restructuring in recent years — still possess the tools and personnel needed to conduct complex counterespionage operations.
“The legal framework is not the main constraint. Enforcement capability is,” he said.
The submission of the bill has already triggered an intense public reaction. Tens of thousands of comments opposing the repeal have been posted on the National Assembly’s bill notification website. Some officials from the ruling party have also distanced themselves from the measure, stating that it reflects the views of individual lawmakers rather than a coordinated party agenda.
It remains unclear whether the legislation will gain further traction. Lawmakers on both sides acknowledge that the issue is unlikely to fade quickly.
As committees begin reviewing the proposal, they are expected to confront a familiar tension: how to modernize statutes criticized as outdated, while ensuring that South Korea retains the tools necessary to respond to persistent security risks.