On December 3, 2024, in an extraordinary and alarming move, South Korea’s then-President Yoon Suk-yeol declared martial law. Although martial law was reversed within hours by the National Assembly, the damage to public trust in the presidency was profound.
In the aftermath of that night, thousands gathered across the country – many of them young people and women who had been placed in increasingly vulnerable situations by Yoon’s policies. They protested against more than just a president. They protested against the manipulation of national security rhetoric and the rollback of human rights protections.
The pivotal presidential election scheduled for June 3 represents more than just a routine electoral exercise – it is an opportunity to raise fundamental human rights deficits that preceded Yoon’s tenure and will persist beyond any single administration if left unaddressed.
Yoon’s presidency brought a further decline in South Korea’s already halting progress on human rights. His approach represented a coordinated effort to undermine mechanisms and institutions protecting the human rights of marginalized people. The martial law crisis was the culmination of this strategy.
One of Yoon’s earliest and most symbolic moves was his proposal to abolish the Ministry of Gender Equality and Family. While the ministry ultimately survived due to parliamentary opposition, the attempt signaled an ideological alignment of government policy with anti-feminist narratives that had fueled his electoral campaign.
Meanwhile, South Korea has become a hotbed of tech-facilitated gender-based violence. The Nth Room case in 2020 revealed systemic failures in both prevention and response to digital sex crimes. Despite public outrage, survivors continue to face digital abuse, delayed or inadequate responses from platforms, and limited legal protection. These are not mere oversights – they represent systemic failures of both state and corporate accountability.
For LGBTI South Koreans, legal invisibility remains the status quo. No comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation exists. No recognition of same-sex partnerships has been established. No specific protections from housing, education, or employment discrimination have been enacted.
Since 2007, at least eight anti-discrimination bills have been introduced and subsequently withdrawn due to political pressure – primarily from conservative religious groups. Despite public support for such legislation, most recently polling over 60 percent, no bill has passed. U.N. bodies have repeatedly recommended that South Korea adopt comprehensive protections against discrimination. Still, the legal void remains.
Judicial progress has been limited. A 2023 appellate court recognized spousal health insurance coverage for same-sex partners. But broader questions – such as legal recognition of queer families – remain unresolved. The Constitutional Court has yet to issue a ruling.
The struggle for disability rights illustrates how institutional inadequacies have pushed discontent into public spaces. Solidarity Against Disability Discrimination (SADD) has conducted early morning subway demonstrations since 2021 to highlight the persistent exclusion of people with disabilities from public transportation. Their approach – non-violent yet purposefully disruptive – ignited national dialogue precisely because conventional advocacy channels had proven ineffective.
Amnesty International documented forceful removal of SADD protesters during peaceful protest, including police dragging protesters out of trains and stations. The Seoul Metro has filed multiple lawsuits against the group seeking damages, and lawmakers have proposed legislation to restrict similar protests in the future.
The protection of all these individuals’ rights requires any incoming administration to prioritize concrete policy action.
Ahead of the upcoming election, ongoing presidential campaigns have been dominated by promises for economic and political reforms. Substantive human rights commitments remain notably absent from major candidates’ platforms.
Comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation, disability access, and protest rights are hardly mentioned. This silence speaks volumes – not only about the continued marginalization of human rights in political discourse, but also about the ongoing neglect in prioritization and implementation of human rights reforms.
South Korea needs comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation that explicitly safeguards against discrimination based on gender, disability, sexual orientation, and gender identity, among other factors. Digital rights must be secured through robust regulation of tech platforms and redress for victims of online gender-based violence. Public infrastructure must become genuinely accessible for all, with clear implementation schedules and sufficient funding. And the right to protest must be upheld, ending punitive measures against peaceful demonstrators.
The resilience of South Korea’s rule of law will be measured by more than the avoidance of martial law. It will depend on how the state responds to the persistent exclusion of people in vulnerable situations from legal protection and public debate.
The current elections should not be seen as a conclusion of the martial law saga, but as the beginning of a new chapter – a fresh opportunity to build a future in which human rights are not ignored, but protected.