Police Confused about Ambiguous Rules

The police argue, “Cracking down on cases that cannot be punished by law will only be accused as human rights violation. We cannot just go on wasting human resources.”

On the morning of September 23, the first day on which the Sex Trade Prevention Act took effect, the police went on a nationwide, sweeping crackdown on sex trade, but some policemen found it hard to do their job due to ambiguous provisions of the law and its effectiveness.

The Sex Trade Prevention Act, unlike the former Prostitution Prevention Law that did not specify the definition of sex trade for harsh punishment of sex trade consumers, specifically defines the act of sex trade.

However, some rules remain ambiguous, causing confusion. First of all, sexual acts that involve part of the body also constitute quasi-sex trade, which is criminalized under the new law. This has created confusion in interpreting the law.

The police point out that quasi-sex trade is hard to prove, and that no precedent has actually characterized the act as sex trade.

One official of the Gangnam Police Office said, “The sex trade itself is hard to regulate due to the difficulty in collecting hard evidence, let alone the quasi-sex trade. We can instead be criticized for violating human rights.”

Accordingly, the Korean National Police Agency sent down a directive to put the quasi-sex trade crackdown on hold until the Justice Ministry says otherwise.

A new rule requires the sex trade committed before the adoption of the act to be dealt with by the previous Prostitution Prevention Law, which is also unclear.

Admittedly, the interpretation of the rule is not a problem in prosecuting the “purchaser” of sex because the offender’s time of the act is clear. When it comes to regulating sex businesses, however, the police, based on their authoritative interpretation, has decided to apply the new Sex Trade Prevention Act because the business had been operating until the point of detection. As a result, business owners are subject to harsher punishments.

The police say that the measure is inevitable to eliminate the sex trade practice, but the sex business owners are voicing great opposition.

The fliers that encourage sex trade are a source of debate, too. The Korean National Police Agency issued a new set of directives to crack down on fliers and advertisements that are harmful to teenagers, which are prescribed in Article 51 of the Juvenile Protection Law.

Nonetheless, some argue that adult-oriented ads should be applied with different standards from those of the teenagers because the materials may have advertising effects without using specific expressions.

A staff member of the national police agency said, “The ads may cause controversy when they just allude to sex trade.”

The police is planning to penalize the real owner of a sex business who has put up a nominal owner, under the act’s provision that allows the punishment of building owners or financiers of the business. The failure of securing solid evidence in the process of investigation can also lead to another controversy of “indiscriminate investigation.” The staff member looked confused, saying, “I’m afraid this debate between human rights violation and the derelict of one’s duty is likely to continue until more concrete and clear regulations or punishment orders are issued.”

needjung@donga.com