ED Conditions for Espionage Act to succeed

The expanded Criminal Act, which now covers espionage activities benefiting other foreign countries or entities beyond North Korea, took effect on Sunday.

The amendment was approved by the National Assembly on Feb. 26, decades after a revision of the law was first proposed.

Before the revision, offenses under the law only covered the collection of intelligence or classified information for North Korea. Offenders could face punitive measures including the death penalty. Accordingly, those who engaged in similar activities on behalf of a third country could avoid punishment for espionage under the previous law.

Under the amended law, however, people who collect intelligence related to national security or share it with agents working for other foreign countries will be subject to punishment. The legislation was much needed as hybrid warfare is in full swing around the world, with nations seeking to expand their influence while countering foreign influence in their own territory.

The amendment should have been introduced much earlier, but partisan politics delayed the legislative process. Even before its implementation, there had been numerous cases involving activities deemed to constitute espionage by foreign countries.

In 2024, a foreign national was detained for using drones to capture aerial footage of the heavily restricted headquarters of the National Intelligence Service (NIS). These activities were deemed to constitute espionage. But at the time, the Criminal Act provided no legal grounds for punishing them.

While the legislation is welcome, the nation now faces the challenge of implementing it effectively.

Foreign infiltration has become more diversified, subtle and sophisticated. Compared with the past, it has become increasingly difficult to detect espionage activities. To respond to this changing environment, intelligence agencies need to strengthen their capabilities to detect and crack down on violators.

Unfortunately, developments in recent years have gone in the opposite direction. The capabilities and competitiveness of South Korea’s intelligence agencies have weakened rather than improved.

There has been a series of reshuffles and organizational changes in intelligence agencies in the name of reform. The NIS, for example, handed over its authority to investigate counterintelligence cases to the police in 2024. The move was part of the Moon Jae-in administration’s drive to reform the NIS and prevent the agency from interfering in domestic politics.

Under the Lee Jae Myung administration, the military intelligence apparatus has also been overhauled. The Defense Counterintelligence Command (DCC) was dissolved in July, bringing an end to an organization that had existed for nearly five decades. Three entities — the Defense Counterintelligence Agency (DCA), Criminal Investigation Command and Defense Security Support Group — were created to take over the DCC’s functions. The DCA will oversee counterintelligence operations.

The DCC reform came after the agency played a critical role during then-President Yoon Suk Yeol’s martial law declaration on Dec. 3, 2024.

It remains questionable whether such a drastic reform was necessary. The Lee government could have considered replacing personnel involved in the martial law episode rather than dissolving the agency entirely.

South Korea’s intelligence agencies have been undergoing massive reshuffles whenever the government changes. Such frequent reorganizations do a disservice to their ability to respond to a rapidly changing security environment.

Intelligence agencies must be insulated from political changes. In the digital era, security threats have become increasingly diversified and sophisticated. Intelligence agencies need to continuously upgrade their capabilities to detect and respond to emerging threats.

Frequent reshuffles will never help them become more capable or competitive. What South Korea needs is not politically driven reorganization, but competent intelligence institutions capable of protecting national security regardless of which government is in power.