If there is a thing like "candle-phobia," former President Lee Myung-bak would still belong to one of its most serious cases. Millions of Seoulites staged two months of candlelit protests against Lee's unwarranted push to import U.S. beef six years ago, prompting him to introduce a ban on outdoor rallies and demonstrations "from sunset to sunrise."
It was a glaring breach of freedom of expression, one of the basic rights in a democracy, by a government that boasted Korea had attained both industrialization and democratization in one generation.
So we warmly welcome the Constitutional Court's ruling Thursday, which found the ban on nighttime demonstrations "unconstitutional in a limited scope." The highest tribunal also ruled the prohibition on night rallies unconstitutional back in 2009.
"Before sunrise and after sunset is too wide and varied a time belt, an excessive restriction which is more than necessary to achieve the goal," the court said. "The ban also unduly limits the freedom of assembly compared with the public good attained by it, violating the principle of equity in the benefit and protection of the law."
Simply put, Article 10 of the Law on Assembly and Demonstration should not have been legislated in the first place.
Proponents of the ban, including major newspapers located in the heart of Seoul that is the venue for such rallies, cite the sufferings of office workers and residents there. Yet it is common sense that the nation should put the basic rights of the general public ahead of the convenience of a limited group. The demonstrators should of course do their best to refrain from blocking traffic or making excessive noise ― unless provoked by heavy-handed law enforcement officers.
It was regrettable, however, the court arbitrarily set the deadline of night protests to midnight instead of leaving the matter to the National Assembly, causing controversy about the judiciary infringing on the latter's legislative right. We see few good reasons why midnight should be the deadline, considering all gatherings and protests, in daytime or nighttime, are under the strict control of police. Also pitiable is why it took the court so long to "normalize what is abnormal" ― one of President Park Geun-hye's pet phrases ― leaving more than 100 related trials in limbo.
Worrisome, too, are the moves of the Supreme Court, which, in part motivated by its rivalry with the Constitutional Court, appears set to push ahead with guilty verdicts in pending appeals, translating the latter's recent decision as half-full, not half-empty. The top court is advised not to, setting an example of respecting the spirit of the law, not its letters.
Which points to the need for parliament not to waste time legislating related revisions. It's long past time for Koreans to show civic spirit, and believe in their ability to do so.
It was a glaring breach of freedom of expression, one of the basic rights in a democracy, by a government that boasted Korea had attained both industrialization and democratization in one generation.
So we warmly welcome the Constitutional Court's ruling Thursday, which found the ban on nighttime demonstrations "unconstitutional in a limited scope." The highest tribunal also ruled the prohibition on night rallies unconstitutional back in 2009.
"Before sunrise and after sunset is too wide and varied a time belt, an excessive restriction which is more than necessary to achieve the goal," the court said. "The ban also unduly limits the freedom of assembly compared with the public good attained by it, violating the principle of equity in the benefit and protection of the law."
Simply put, Article 10 of the Law on Assembly and Demonstration should not have been legislated in the first place.
Proponents of the ban, including major newspapers located in the heart of Seoul that is the venue for such rallies, cite the sufferings of office workers and residents there. Yet it is common sense that the nation should put the basic rights of the general public ahead of the convenience of a limited group. The demonstrators should of course do their best to refrain from blocking traffic or making excessive noise ― unless provoked by heavy-handed law enforcement officers.
It was regrettable, however, the court arbitrarily set the deadline of night protests to midnight instead of leaving the matter to the National Assembly, causing controversy about the judiciary infringing on the latter's legislative right. We see few good reasons why midnight should be the deadline, considering all gatherings and protests, in daytime or nighttime, are under the strict control of police. Also pitiable is why it took the court so long to "normalize what is abnormal" ― one of President Park Geun-hye's pet phrases ― leaving more than 100 related trials in limbo.
Worrisome, too, are the moves of the Supreme Court, which, in part motivated by its rivalry with the Constitutional Court, appears set to push ahead with guilty verdicts in pending appeals, translating the latter's recent decision as half-full, not half-empty. The top court is advised not to, setting an example of respecting the spirit of the law, not its letters.
Which points to the need for parliament not to waste time legislating related revisions. It's long past time for Koreans to show civic spirit, and believe in their ability to do so.
![[INTERVIEW] Ex-NIS chief urges politicians to stop misusing spy agency](https://img.koreatimes.co.kr/upload/thumbnailV2/59da8df88faa4a50ad42945501b03bca.jpg/dims/resize/178/optimize)
![[INTERVIEW] Meet the man behind giant rubber ducks that once took over Seoul](https://img.koreatimes.co.kr/upload/thumbnailV2/df32c60c8204448e98ccdb9841366bec.jpg/dims/resize/178/optimize)
![[REVIEW] Musical 'Monte Cristo' returns with riveting tale of vengeance, love](https://img.koreatimes.co.kr/upload/thumbnailV2/3934be1fa6844478b619a015d610bc5b.jpg/dims/resize/178/optimize)
