'저는 그들의 땅을 지키기 위하여 싸웠던 인디안들의 이야기를 기억합니다. 백인들이 그들의 신성한 숲에 도로를 만들기 위하여 나무들을 잘랐습니다. 매일밤 인디안들이 나가서 백인들이 만든 그 길을 해체하면 그 다음 날 백인들이 와서 도로를 다시 짓곤 했습니다. 한동안 그 것이 반복되었습니다. 그러던 어느날, 숲에서 가장 큰 나무가 백인들이 일할 동안 그들 머리 위로 떨어져 말과 마차들을 파괴하고 그들 중 몇몇을 죽였습니다. 그러자 백인들은 떠났고 결코 다시 오지 않았습니다….' (브루스 개그논)





For any updates on the struggle against the Jeju naval base, please go to savejejunow.org and facebook no naval base on Jeju. The facebook provides latest updates.

Saturday, October 30, 2010

Text Fwd: Defense Ministry retaliates against challengers of book ban 국방부, 책금지에 도전한 장교들에 보복

*Image & caption source: same as the link

'Dismissed military judicial officers who challenged the military ban of “seditious books” present their position on the ruling in front of the Constitutional Court, Oct. 28 (Photo by Lee Jong-keun)'

Hankyoreh
Defense Ministry retaliates against challengers of book ban
: Military judicial officers dismissed by the government have lost careers in the military, and some have incurred bans on practicing law

Posted on : Oct.29,2010 14:35 KST
By Noh Hyun-woong

Following the Constitutional Court’s ruling Thursday granting an indulgence to the Ministry of National Defense in its designation and restriction of access to “seditious books,” attention is focusing on the situation of the military judicial officers who played “David” to the ministry’s “Goliath.”
____________________________________________________

* Related article

Hankyoreh
[Editorial] An unconstitutional ban on books

Excerpt:

The Constitutional Court has ruled the Ministry of National Defense’s designations of “seditious books” to be constitutional. This means that the ministry can prohibit books with content it believes seriously diminishes the armed forces’ spiritual fighting strength. It is regrettable that the Constitutional Court, which should be serving as a bulwark protecting basic rights, has instead given a free pass to a clear violation of those rights.

As the court itself acknowledged, Article 16, Item 2 of the military service regulations, which the ministry took as its basis for designating the books in question, places restrictions on the “right to know.” As a result, freedoms of scholarship, thought, and conscience can also be violated.

Even if a soldier is in a special situation where he or she must have basic rights such as freedom of residence and relocation restricted to some extent compared to ordinary citizens, the rule is that those restrictions should be limited to what is strictly necessary, and that the essential content of basic rights cannot be infringed upon. Guaranteeing basic rights without exception is the beating heart of constitutionalism.

No comments:

Post a Comment