Experts of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination Welcome the Republic of Korea’s Time Limit for Immigration Detention, Raise Questions on High Rates of Migrant Worker Deaths and the Treatment of Defectors from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea
The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination today concluded its consideration of the combined twentieth to twenty-second periodic reports of the Republic of Korea, with Committee Experts welcoming the State’s decision to introduce a time limit for immigration detention, while raising questions on the high number of deaths of migrant workers and the treatment of those defecting from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.
Stamatia Stavrinaki, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, said the Committee welcomed the Constitutional Court’s ruling in 2023 finding unconstitutional the prolonged detention of migrants without a time limit pending deportation and the lack of an independent judicial review. While the introduction of a time limit was positive, the Committee was concerned by several reports on immigration detention in the State party, and raised questions to this effect.
Ms. Stavrinaki also said that according to a study conducted by the National Human Rights Commission in 2024, the rate of industrial accident deaths among migrant workers was consistently 1.7 times higher than that of nationals of the Republic of Korea. Did the State party acknowledge that hazardous jobs were disproportionately assigned to migrant workers? What lessons had the State party drawn from the June 2024 explosion at the Aricell battery manufacturing plant, which resulted in the deaths of 18 migrant workers, and what actions had been taken in response?
Yeung Kam John Yeung Sik Yuen, Committee Expert and County Co-Rapporteur, said according to the 2024 Settlement Survey by the Korea Hana Foundation, the unemployment rate among escapees from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea was more than double the national average of 3 per cent, and average monthly wages were 83.7 per cent of the national average. The survey also found that 16.3 per cent of escapees had experienced discrimination or contempt in the society of the Republic of Korea. What measures had been taken by the Government to address economic and social discrimination against escapees from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea?
The delegation said there had been a fire in June 2024 in Aricell where 18 migrant workers were tragically killed. The Government had had an onsite support team with a bereavement officer assigned to each family, and compensation was provided. Facilities and equipment were being provided to enable the fast evacuation of foreign workers and prevent reoccurrence. Regarding the Aricell tragedy, a legal support team was established in the aftermath of the disaster to provide legal assistance, and a team was established to provide psychosocial support.
The delegation said systematic support had been established for defectors from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. Those who entered the Republic of Korea received 12 weeks of social adaptation training, settlement funding, rental money and employment support. A national day was established to improve awareness about defectors from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. Any defector from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea who requested protection from the Republic of Korea would be protected. Once they had acquired the citizenship of the Republic of Korea, they were given the right to relocate and seek asylum to a third country, if they wished.
Introducing the report, Ki Hwan Kweon, Deputy Minister for Multilateral and Global Affairs of the Republic of Korea and head of the delegation, said every five years, the Government adopted the master plan for immigration policy. Key policy priorities included improving the detention system, strengthening the protection of migrant women and children, and improving the process of refugee screening procedures. Since 2004, the Republic of Korea had implemented the employment permit system, which allowed small and medium-sized enterprises to legally employ foreign workers. To date, over one million migrant workers had entered the Republic of Korea through this system. The World Bank’s 2023 World Development Report recognised this system as a model framework for migrant workers.
In concluding remarks, Ms. Stavrinaki thanked the delegation and all those who had been involved in the dialogue. The people of the Republic of Korea had consistently stood on the right side of history, fighting for independence, resisting authoritarianism, and defending democracy and the rule of law. It was hoped that once again, the State would choose the right side of history, leading by example in speedily eliminating the policies that raised and sustained racial barriers, and in fully implementing the Committee’s recommendations.
In his closing remarks, Mr. Kewon said the delegation of the Republic of Korea expressed sincere gratitude to the Committee for the dialogue. The Committee’s recommendations would be instrumental in developing policies to protect the rights of foreigners and migrants. The Republic of Korea had contributed 40,000 dollars to the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in support of the Committee’s activities.
The delegation of the Republic of Korea consisted of representatives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs; the Ministry of Justice; the Ministry of Gender Equality and Family; the Ministry of Health and Welfare; the Ministry of Education; the Ministry of Employment and Labour; the Communications Commission of the Republic of Korea; and the Permanent Mission of the Republic of Korea to the United Nations Office at Geneva.
The Committee will issue its concluding observations on the report of the Republic of Korea after the conclusion of its one hundred and fifteenth session on 9 May 2025. The programme of work and other documents related to the session can be found here. Summaries of the public meetings of the Committee can be found here, while webcasts of the public meetings can be found here.
The Committee will next meet in public on Wednesday, 30 April at 3.p.m to review the tenth periodic report of Gabon (CERD/C/GAB/10).
Report
The Committee has before it the combined twentieth to twenty-second periodic reports of the Republic of Korea (CERD/C/KOR/20-22).
Presentation of Report
KI HWAN KWEON, Deputy Minister for Multilateral and Global Affairs of the Republic of Korea and head of the delegation, said over the past decades, the Republic of Korea had seen a steady increase in foreign residents to roughly 2.6 million, or five per cent of the total population. With this demographic shift, the need for an inclusive policy towards foreigners and migrants had been brought to the forefront of the national policy agenda.
At the recommendations of the Committee, discussions on anti-discrimination legislation began in 2006 and around 10 bills had since been submitted to the National Assembly. Although none of them had passed as of yet, the four bills proposed during the twenty-first session of the National Assembly had been discussed more seriously than the previous ones. The Government would participate in relevant discussions when similar bills would be introduced in the twenty-second session of the National Assembly.
In the Republic of Korea, discrimination based on race, nationality or colour was prohibited under article 11 of the Constitution. Victims of such discrimination, including foreigners, could file complaints to the National Human Rights Commission of the Republic of Korea, which was empowered to investigate and recommend action for remedies.
Every five years, the Government adopted the master plan for immigration policy. Key policy priorities included improving the detention system, strengthening the protection of migrant women and children, and improving the process of refugee screening procedures. Since 2004, the Republic of Korea had implemented the employment permit system, which allowed small and medium-sized enterprises to legally employ foreign workers. To date, over one million migrant workers had entered the Republic of Korea through this system. The World Bank’s 2023 World Development Report recognised this system as a model framework for migrant workers.
The Government also operated a skilled worker points system visa, which allowed foreign employees working legally in the Republic of Korea for a certain period of time to change their status to a visa that permitted long-term employment and family accompaniment. The Government expanded the annual quota for the system significantly from the previous 2,000 to 35,000.
In 2013, the Republic of Korea became the first Asian country to enact a stand-alone refugee act in 2013. Since then, the number of asylum applications had increased sharply from 1,600 in 2013 to over 18,000 in 2023. To improve interpretation services for applicants with limited Korean language skills, a professional certification system for refugee interpreters was introduced in 2021. As of January, 393 certified interpreters were providing services in 36 languages. Once asylum seekers were recognised as refugees in the Republic of Korea, the Government provided them with guidebooks on social adaptation in various languages, including Korean, English, Arabic and Burmese.
There were approximately 180,000 marriage migrants in the Republic of Korea and 80 per cent of them were women. The Government had prepared the international marriage guidance programme for Korean nationals who intended to sponsor their migrant spouses to enhance mutual cultural understanding. Married migrants were provided with tailored services such as counselling, interpretation, language training and parenting support through 244 family centres nationwide.
A vocational training programme for marriage migrants seeking employment was launched last year and was attended by more than 2,500 participants. Three bills were currently pending in the National Assembly to establish a universal birth registration system that required all foreign children born in the Republic of Korea to be registered at birth regardless of their parents’ legal status.
While the Republic of Korea's social security framework act was mainly applicable to citizens, foreigners were eligible for certain programmes in the act under specific circumstances. For example, legally recognised refugees and some marriage migrants could receive livelihood, medical, housing and education benefits under the national basic livelihood security system. Mr. Kweon concluded by stating that the delegation looked forward to engaging in a sincere and constructive dialogue with the Committee.
Statement by the National Human Rights Institution
A representative from the National Human Rights Commission of the Republic of Korea said the Republic of Korea was currently facing a moment of transformation unlike any in the past. In recent years, more migrants were coming to the Republic of Korea for various purposes such as work or study. The Government, in response to labour shortages caused by low birth rates and population aging, was seeking to increase the inflow of migrants, especially migrant workers. However, many improvements were still needed in the Republic of Korea’s migrant policies and pertaining to public perception toward migrants.
The Government had significantly cut the 2024 budget for migrant workers support centres, which offered labour and life counselling services, as well as Korean language and legal education. Unpaid wages owed to migrant workers were increasing, with the average annual arrears exceeding 100 billion won since 2019.
At the same time, undocumented migrant workers who visited labour offices for consultation or redress were still being detained and deported. In 2018, following the death of an undocumented migrant during a crackdown, the Commission launched an ex officio investigation and recommended that the Government take steps to prevent recurrence. Xenophobic sentiment among the general public, especially against undocumented migrants, especially those from certain countries, was worsening. However, under the Republic of Korea’s domestic law, there were still no adequate legal measures to regulate hate speech or hate-motivated crimes.
Although the number of asylum applications had reached approximately 20,000 per year, the refugee recognition rate remained at around 1 per cent annually. As of the end of 2024, it took more than four years on average to complete the process and asylum seekers were generally prohibited from working during this time period.
This prohibition left many asylum seekers in extremely difficult living conditions during this period. Appropriate resource allocation was necessary to ensure the National Human Rights Commission could play a more active role in eliminating racial discrimination.
MICHAL BALCERZAK, Committee Chairperson, said the Committee benefitted from the outstanding expertise of Chinsung Chung from the Republic of Korea, and would like her to stay on as a member of the Committee.
Questions by Committee Experts
STAMATIA STAVRINAKI, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, said this was the thirteenth time the Republic of Korea was appearing before the Committee and the Committee deeply appreciated the country’s engagement. It was hoped that Committee member Chinsung Chung would be re-elected to the Committee.
YEUNG KAM JOHN YEUNG SIK YUEN, Committee Expert and County Co-Rapporteur, said despite recommendations from the Committee, the State party reported that it did not collect statistics on the population by ethnicity and race. The number of foreigners living in the Republic of Korea had been increasing persistently, although in 2020 it had dropped by approximately 500,000; this was linked to the COVID-19 pandemic. Could further information be provided on the reasons for this decrease, including travel restrictions, and whether foreign nationals suffered a proportionately higher death toll because of lack of access to testing, or vaccines?
In 2020, there were around two million foreign nationals, with most coming from the region or sub-region, namely China, Viet Nam, Thailand, Philippines, Japan and Cambodia, as well as an exception, the United States. What were the number of Africans living in the Republic of Korea? Could the figures on asylum applicants be provided, disaggregated by nationality?
In practice, there had been reluctance by courts to refer to international treaties as the reason or basis of any court decision. What measures were being taken to ensure the proper implementation of the Convention through appropriate training of personnel? Currently, there was no legal provision in domestic law that defined racial discrimination. What specific measures did the State party plan to take to overcome the resistance in the National Assembly to pass a comprehensive anti-discrimination law? Would the Republic of Korea consider introducing a specific law which explicitly and comprehensively prohibited racial discrimination, in line with article 1 of the Convention?
According to a survey conducted in 2019 by the National Human Rights Commission of the Republic of Korea, 68.4 per cent of respondents declared they had experienced racial discrimination due primarily to lack of the country’s language skills, because they were not nationals of the State, or due to their race. Could data be provided on the number of cases of racial discrimination reported to the relevant authorities? Could information be provided on the nationality and gender of the complainants and their legal status, and the percentage of investigations and prosecutions of those complaints and the outcomes? Could the delegation respond to concerns that the National Human Rights Commission of the Republic of Korea had not been adequately fulfilling its role in protecting individuals from discrimination, especially vulnerable groups? Had problems relating to overlapping functions ever arisen?
When and how did the State party intend to amend its legislation to ensure it was fully in line with the Convention, including measures planned to explicitly criminalise racially motivated hate crimes and include it as an aggravating factor leading to enhanced penalties? When would the State party implement the much-needed data collection mechanism on such crimes? According to the periodic report, the term “illegal immigrants” was used under current law. The Committee noted the adoption last year of an amendment to the framework act on treatment of foreigners residing in the Republic of Korea which replaced the term “foreigners living in Korea and illegal immigrants” with the term “foreigners residing in the country”. Could the delegation provide further information on measures taken to remove the usage of the term “illegal immigrants” from all legislation?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said a partial amendment bill to the National Human Rights Commission act was pending before the National Assembly. Under the bill, the National Human Rights Commission of the Republic of Korea would follow the same budgetary allocations as an independent entity.
The fourth national action plan was composed of six policy objectives and 271 policy tasks. The improvement to anti-discrimination legislation was announced within this plan. Four legislative bills had been proposed in this regard, and a public hearing was held in the National Assembly for the review of the bills. Racially motivated hate speech and hate crimes did not have any specific legal provisions punishing such acts.
The Government of the Republic of Korea worked with the Independent Standards Commission to strengthen self-regulation in the private sector regarding inappropriate content. The court had ruled that racially discriminatory expressions could not be allowed under domestic law.
Every second year, human rights training and training on the treaties were provided to judges. Awareness raising related efforts were also underway for the general public, including elementary and middle school students. Moving forward, to continue to raise awareness about racial discrimination, there would be significant training, including legal training. Training was provided to the Prosecution Service and border control officials, including on investigations into human trafficking, the immigration act and international treaties, among others. This training was provided to more than 5,000 professionals in 2024.
The four bills before the twenty-first session of the National Assembly differed in the scope of application and remedies for victims. Currently, in the twenty-second session of the National Assembly, no comprehensive anti-racism bill had been introduced thus far.
Demographic statistics of foreigners residing and working in the Republic of Korea were classified by nationality, gender and visa status and were managed on a regular basis. However, demographics based on religious background could not be produced separately. As of 2024, there were around 2.65 million foreigners residing in the Republic of Korea. Three countries from Asia accounted for about 55 per cent of the total figure. There were 168 stateless persons residing in the Republic of Korea, with 138 being long-term residents who had completed foreigner registration.
The term “illegal immigrants” meant there had been violations of the law pertaining to residence in the country. However, as this term could lead to a negative perception, this term had been deleted, and had been replaced by the broader concept “foreign residents”.
Questions by Committee Experts
YEUNG KAM JOHN YEUNG SIK YUEN, Committee Expert and County Co-Rapporteur, said there were three bodies represented on the National Human Rights Commission: the President, the judiciary and the National Assembly that were each meant to appoint four members. Was it a problem that the appointments were made by three separate bodies as opposed to one appointment body? Was this why there was some discord within the Commission?
STAMATIA STAVRINAKI, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, said it was a bit disappointing that there had not been a more concrete commitment from the State on fulfilling obligations under article 4. What did it mean that the Government supported the four bills before the Parliament? It was hoped a stronger commitment would be seen in this regard.
Another Committee Expert welcomed the large delegation from the Republic of Korea. The Committee would like the State to legislate on all aspects of the Convention and its general recommendations. On what grounds were the bills discussed rejected by the National Assembly? What reparations were granted to victims of racial discrimination?
An Expert asked how many times the State met with civil society representatives when preparing the report?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said the National Human Rights Commission of the Republic of Korea was an independent body. For general naturalisation applicants, 60 million won of minimum assets needed to be proven as income.
Questions by a Committee Expert
STAMATIA STAVRINAKI, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, said migrant workers, under the employment permit system, were only allowed to change workplaces within designated regions and within a three-month timeframe. Did the State party provide any form of assistance to help migrant workers find alternative employment within designated areas, to prevent forced departure or a forced shift to undocumented status? How many migrant workers had utilised provisions introduced in 2017 to allow a change of workplace in cases of serious labour and human rights violations by employers? Could the delegation explain to the Committee the “letter of release” policy which kept migrant workers dependent on their employers?
What measures had the State party taken to prevent and protect against human rights violations committed by private actors? Could an update be provided on the migrant worker regional settlement support project, which gave the authority to nine local governments to provide labour-related consultations, interpretation support, and education in the language of the Republic of Korea? Would the State party consider removing the requirement to depart and re-enter the country? Why did the State party promote policies that clearly restricted family life for migrant workers?
Why had the State party chosen to broaden the scope of exceptions and limit the protections available to migrant workers, such as domestic and care sectors? What outcomes had been achieved under the third master plan for immigration policy? Could concrete examples be provided of cases in which foreign workers filed complaints with regional employment and labour offices following violations of labour regulations? What measures had the State party taken to ensure effective remedies, including reparations, for migrant workers?
Following the tragic death of a migrant worker in a greenhouse accommodation, the Ministry of Employment and Labour allowed employers to submit a certificate of construction approval issued by local governments. This allowed employers to get the permission without implementing their accommodation plans as submitted to the authorities. What steps had been taken following the 2021 survey by the Ministry of Employment and Labour, which found that nearly half of all migrant workers and 70 per cent of those working in agriculture were still housed in non-residential accommodations?
According to a study conducted by the National Human Rights Commission in 2024, the rate of industrial accident deaths among migrant workers was consistently 1.7 times higher than that of nationals of the Republic of Korea. Did the State party acknowledge that hazardous jobs were disproportionately assigned to migrant workers? What lessons had the State party drawn from the June 2024 explosion at the Aricell battery manufacturing plant, which resulted in the deaths of 18 migrant workers, and what actions had been taken in response?
Could the delegation clarify what protections were available to temporary visa holders, migrants and their dependents during the six-month waiting period before becoming eligible for regional national health insurance and refugee applicants? Could an update be provided on the applicability and scope of protection of the basic social security act and measures taken to enable the registration of migrants with disabilities and their access to welfare services? What measures were in place to prevent false accusations from abusive employers?
The Committee welcomed the information on the Police Code of Conduct on Human Rights and on trainings, as well as the exemption of reporting undocumented migrants during investigations. However, there were reports on the rise of extremist groups of youth targeting undocumented migrants. What measures had been taken to investigate and punish accordingly racially motivated crimes against undocumented migrants? Was it realistic for the State party to continue treating issues such as wage arrears and criminal acts against migrants as entirely separate, when in practice it was the lack of adequate labour protections and effective State safeguards that contributed to exploitation and violence against migrants?
The Committee welcomed the Constitutional Court’s ruling in 2023 finding unconstitutional the prolonged detention of migrants without a time limit pending deportation and the lack of an independent judicial review. While the introduction of a limit was positive, the Committee was concerned by reports that recourse to immigration detention was systematic in the State party, resulting in approximately 40,000 individuals being detained for prolonged periods. What was the availability of alternatives to immigration detention, and the effective application of any such alternatives?
Could an update on cases of use of excessive force against undocumented migrant workers be provided? It was reported that joint raids and crackdowns resulted in significant harm, including deaths and injuries. Had the State party evaluated these operations to assess the harm caused? Were the victims provided with an effective remedy, including reparations? What statistics were available on crimes reported by undocumented migrants who had been victims of human rights violations since the adoption of the enforcement decree of the immigration act?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said laws on labour relations applied to foreign workers on the same basis as citizens of the Republic of Korea. Legislation was amended in 2022 so that employees who were penalised for the death of a foreign worker in an industrial accident were restricted from employing additional foreign workers. All foreign workers under the employment permit system were provided with pre and post arrival employment education where they learnt about redress agencies. Some 62 native language counsellors were deployed to assist foreign workers. Regional councils for the protection of the rights of foreign workers were convened twice a year to listen to opinions from the field on protecting the rights of foreign workers. Under the employment permit system, foreign workers could move to another workplace.
Since the restructuring of the migrant workers support service, the number of counsellors and the number of support offices had increased. Around 45 educational institutions had been added to make education more accessible to foreign workers. In 2024, wage arrears regarding foreign workers had declined. For foreign workers under the employment permit system, employers were required to enrol into a wage guarantee assurance. Foreign workers facing wage arrears were able to lodge complaints on the same basis as nationals. In 2024, around 10,000 cases were reported by foreign workers. To facilitate the redress process, native language counsellors and the counselling service for foreign workers provided interpretation services.
To protect the rights of foreign workers, inspections were conducted every year and foreign workers were interviewed. Regarding the housing environment, new employment permits were no longer being issued. For any housing violations related to illegal makeshift structures, the employers who provided these were subject to strict measures. Since August 2024, the workplaces that employed foreign workers received occupational health and safety inspections.
If a foreign migrant stayed in the workplace for more than four years, skilled worker visa transition became possible. There had been a fire in June 2024 in Aricell where 18 migrant workers were tragically killed. The Government had had an onsite support team with a bereavement officer assigned to each family, and compensation was provided. Facilities and equipment were being provided to enable the fast evacuation of foreign workers and prevent reoccurrence. Regarding the Aricell tragedy, a legal support team was established in the aftermath of the disaster to provide legal assistance, and a team was established to provide psychosocial support.
The maximum period to detain someone in immigration detention was nine months, but this could be extended to 20 in particular circumstances. Injuries in crackdown situations usually happened when the foreigners fled to avoid it. To prevent accidents, the crackdown sites were visited in advance, and specific safety measures were developed. In areas at risk of accidents, excessive crackdown was avoided. After the crackdown, the surrounding areas were always checked for injured persons before leaving, to ensure the protection of human rights.
Questions by Committee Experts
STAMATIA STAVRINAKI, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, asked how specific labour abuses were dealt with; data would be useful in this regard? What kind of violations had been found by the labour bodies? Did immigrants have legal reprise to defend themselves against prolonged detention?
YEUNG KAM JOHN YEUNG SIK YUEN, Committee Expert and County Co-Rapporteur, said there had been a case of an undocumented migrant who was arrested and subjected to gross physical abuse. The National Human Rights Commission of the Republic of Korea had provided valuable information which needed to be shared, including on this issue. In a survey conducted by the Commission in 2021, 70 per cent of respondents reported having experienced hate speech either online or offline in the past year, an increase on the previous survey in 2019. Muslims had been a particular target of racist hate speech.
The most notorious example was the protest by local residents against the construction of a mosque in Daegu City, which involved leaving pig heads and organising pork BBQ parties in the vicinity of the mosque site. What measures did the State party envisage to ensure a peaceful resolution of the conflict surrounding the construction of the Daegu mosque?
Another serious incident involved organised groups arresting, detaining and assaulting persons assumed to be undocumented migrants while filming the process and posting it on the internet; had there been an investigation into this terrible form of human rights abuse? Had there been prosecutions and sentences handed down to the perpetrators?
A Committee Expert said there were complex situations in Asia regarding co-ethnic migrants. What issues did migrants who were married face? What did this imply in terms of law? What was the international marriage programme?
FAITH DIKELEDI PANSY TLAKULA, Committee Expert and Follow-up Rapporteur, thanked the Republic of Korea for the follow-up report, which was received in the specified period of one year. According to information provided, there were 45,000 cases reported by migrant workers; what did these cases entail and what were their outcomes? Why was data on the force used in crackdowns not being kept? Information had been received that a dead body of a migrant worker from Thailand was found in the vicinity of the factory where he worked in 2019; was the State aware of this case and had it been investigated? The information provided in the follow-up report was partially satisfactory, but more information was required.
A Committee Expert said two to three fatal accidents of migrants had been reported; had any investigations been opened? It seemed there was no guarantee for individual protection in the workplace for these migrants.
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said the Government of the Republic of Korea had amended the enforcement rules of the immigration act, ensuring the investigation of violence or sexual violence acts, preventing these crimes which exploited vulnerable foreigners. Prior to detention orders issued at the immigration detention committee, in 2025 a new relevant rule came into effect which stipulated that if the head of the regional immigration service issued a detention order, the foreign national was given the opportunity to provide their views in advance. Improvement of the treatment of refugees and the diversification of refugee protection policies were being carried out in line with the Republic of Korea’s national standards.
Questions by Committee Experts
YEUNG KAM JOHN YEUNG SIK YUEN, Committee Expert and County Co-Rapporteur, said the Committee had been informed that despite thousands of asylum applications and appeals being filed each year, there were only four fully qualified refugee screening officers, leading to a reliance on less qualified immigration officials, of which there were only approximately 90 in total. The Refugee Committee, which handled appeals, remained an ad hoc structure with only 15 members. Did the Refugee Committee operate as a collegiate body. Could the delegation respond to all the concerns raised?
How did the State party ensure that the criteria for granting international protection was plied in a non-discriminatory way? Would the State party consider publishing full statistics on asylum applications by nationality? Could an update be provided on the amendment of the refugee act that would guarantee the availability of interpretation services during the application and submission processes for refugee applicants?
While noting that the refugee act explicitly affirmed non-refoulement obligations, there were reports of deportation orders being issued to refugees, humanitarian status holders, and asylum seekers, leading some of them to depart from the country in circumstances that may be regarded as constituting refoulement. How did the State party intend to address these concerns? According to data from the Ministry of Justice, the rate of non-referral decisions for refugee status applications at the ports of entry and departure between 2013 and 2024 was 60 per cent. Did the State party intend to establish a legal assistance system for such persons?
The Committee was concerned that humanitarian status holders did not have the same rights as refugees, including with regard to family reunification and access to basic services. Could more information be provided on the rationale for and content of restrictions and differences of treatment by the State party towards humanitarian status holders? Would measures be taken to address this disparity in rights?
The Committee noted with concern that the amendment to the immigration act introduced a longer, 20-month limit for asylum applicants who initiated their application while already subject to immigration detention. How was this longer time compatible with the aim to minimise the period of detention? The Committee was also concerned by reports indicating the frequent recourse to detention of asylum seekers, with only a limited number granted temporary release; could the delegation comment on such reports? Under article 40 of the refugee act, asylum seekers were prohibited from engaging in employment for six months from the date of application. What measures did the State party plan to take to ensure effective access for asylum seekers to work permits, health care and basic needs assistance?
The Committee was concerned about reports indicating that because escapees from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea were not considered “foreigners” under the Republic of Korea’s domestic law, they did not benefit from the legal safeguards against refoulement under the refugee act. Did the State party intend to codify in an act of the National Assembly the principle of non-refoulement for escapees from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea arriving in the Republic of Korea?
According to the 2024 Settlement Survey by the Korea Hana Foundation, the unemployment rate among escapees from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea was more than double the national average of 3 per cent, and average monthly wages were 83.7 per cent of the national average. The survey also found that 16.3 per cent of escapees from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea had experienced discrimination or contempt in the society of the Republic of Korea. What measures had been taken by the Government to address economic and social discrimination against escapees from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said migrants who were employees in the Republic of Korea were covered by health insurance on the same basis as nationals. In June 2023, the seasonal worker status period was extended from five to eight months. These workers were now eligible for health insurance. Premiums for foreign nationals and nationals were calculated in a slightly different way. Migrants enrolled into the health insurance service were charged the average premium for all insurance users. For those in agriculture industries and remote areas, health insurance premiums were reduced by up to fifty per cent. Foreign nationals received greater benefits in their health insurance compared to the premiums they paid.
Refugees and other foreigners were provided with basic self-sufficiency benefits. Social security was applied for foreigners with disabilities based on the reciprocity principle. Depending on the type of disability, registration could take up to two years, with assessments required. This was required for both nationals and foreigners, which made it difficult for those staying for a short time to complete the process. The special act on public housing was limited to nationals from the Republic of Korea. Public housing support for foreign nationals could not be extended at the moment.
The 10,000 reported cases and complaints referred to wage arrears filed by foreign workers. To protect the rights of foreign workers, native language councillors were directly stationed at local offices, providing translation services. Annual supervision and inspections were conducted for foreign workers, with interpreters present. If violations were found, corrective or judicial measures were imposed. If a corrective measure was imposed, this must be actioned and reported to the labour inspector who would verify compliance on-site. If the measure was not complied with, fines could be issued and the case could be transferred to the Prosecutor’s Office. Foreign workers received occupational health service and training before and after entering the country.
Racial discrimination and hate against refugees promoted by disinformation were addressed by monitoring, reviews and sanctions. Efforts were underway to prevent the distribution of this disinformation.
In the case of emergency detention, the person was informed of the reason for their detention and provided with information on their rights. When a foreigner was admitted to a detention room, a sheet translated into eight languages was provided to the detainee to inform them that a person of their choice would be notified for the reason of their detention, including the consul of that person’s country.
An immigrant by marriage referred to a foreigner who was married to a Korean national. The F6 marriage migrant visa was provided to such individuals. Family reunion referred to migration based on marriage based among foreigners. The number of divorces had declined since the enforcement of the international marriage guidance programme in 2011.
Questions by Committee Experts
YEUNG KAM JOHN YEUNG SIK YUEN, Committee Expert and County Co-Rapporteur, said almost 20 per cent of foreign workers were undocumented workers, which was a situation where big problems could arise, including difficult, dangerous, and dirty work. It was in cases like these where these workers could be exploited, and many were not covered by insurance. How many cases had been reported and what were the sentences?
STAMATIA STAVRINAKI, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, said none of the questions on refugees had been answered. Could the delegation share concrete data on many of the issues discussed, including migrants with disabilities who had received welfare benefits? How many of the 10,000 in wage arrears had received their wages? How many of those employees had been convicted? How many hate crimes and hate speech cases had been prosecuted and convicted?
An Expert asked on what basis the 156 stateless persons in the Republic of Korea were identified? How was it ensured that stateless persons obtained appropriate legal status in line with obligations?
A Committee Expert asked if the State would consider employing more experts to manage the situation of refugees and asylum seekers?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said in 2013, there were only 1,574 refugee applications, but this had soared twelve-fold to more than 18,000 applications. The Government had mandated audio and video recording of the refugee interview process, and had hired external refugee interpreters. In 2020, the Government of the Republic of Korea established the Refugee Appeals Commission. Recognised refugees were entitled to social and basic security, and access to Korean language and basic education, under the refugee act. A guidebook had been produced in four languages and distributed to recognised refugees.
Cases for extending immigration detention were for extenuating circumstances, including when the person posed a threat to the public or when they lied to obtain refugee status. At ports of entry, the refugee application system needed to be considered in both human rights and immigration control aspects. Foreigners whose application was rejected at the point of entry could apply for appeal which halted any repatriation procedures. Recognised refugees were granted resident status, with a period of stay for up to three years at one time, while humanitarian holders were granted a miscellaneous stay for a period of up to one year. They were allowed to reside and work in the Republic of Korea but did not receive the same benefits as recognised refugees. By amending the immigration act, the Republic of Korea changed the operation of waiting rooms from the private sector to the State, with meals provided at the Government’s expense.
Questions by Committee Experts
STAMATIA STAVRINAKI, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, said concerns remained in relation to traditional gender roles impacting residency, the naturalisation system for marriage migrants, as well as legal proof of fault in marriage dissolution. Divorce lawsuits between marriage migrants and nationals of the Republic of Korea accounted for 42 per cent of all divorces, much higher than the rate for two nationals. Migrant women raising children with spouses from the Republic of Korea could stay under F-6 status until the child reached adulthood, after which they often needed to switch to F-1 status, which restricted employment.
Would the State party simplify the permanent residence and naturalisation processes to allow marriage migrants to extend their residency and be naturalised autonomously, regardless of the reasons for the dissolution of the marriage, childcare situation, or whether the spouse from the Republic of Korea supported the family? Would the State party consider establishing a mechanism for migrant women to report gender-based violence, and facilitate their access to justice and remedies?
What measures had been taken to collect statistics on returned marriage migrant women and their children? What judicial and administrative support was provided to returned marriage migrants regarding divorce proceedings, child custody, and child support? What steps had been taken in collaboration with the authorities of Viet Nam, China, the Philippines, and Thailand to prevent children of Korean nationality living abroad from losing their legal status due to visa and passport issues, and to ensure their access to healthcare and education? What were the results of recent legislative amendments and policy changes related to support for victims of gender-based violence, which extended the scope of coverage to foreigners? What statistics were available on complaints lodged of gender-based violence, investigations carried out, convictions of perpetrators, and the reparations provided to victims?
The Committee welcomed the ratification of the Palermo Protocol or the anti-trafficking protocol. However, serious gaps remained in legislation, the institutional framework and practices. Would the State party consider amending the protection of trafficking victims act and the Criminal Code’s definition of trafficking in persons to bring them into alignment with the Palermo Protocol? Would the State party establish criminal penalties for human trafficking offenses under the act on prevention of human trafficking and protection of victims? Would the State party make the trafficking victim identification indicators mandatory for immigration and law enforcement officials, especially in high-risk industries such as the entertainment industry, agriculture, and fishing? Would the process for determining victim status and granting legal residency be expedited to ensure victims had access to justice and rehabilitation?
Would the Republic of Korea consider conducting a national survey on the human rights conditions of seasonal migrant workers to help identify exploitative practices in recruitment, employment, and living conditions? Would the State party ban exploitative practices by private recruiters? What steps had the State party taken to implement the recommendations of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, in providing visas and reparations to three Filipino trafficking victims, and strengthening trafficking efforts? What progress had been made in the implementation of the act on the prevention of trafficking in persons and protection of victims and the first comprehensive plan for the prevention of human trafficking (2023–2027)?
It was reported that 4,000 migrant children remained unregistered. Could updated and detailed information be provided on the legislative proceedings for universal birth registration? What was the status of the draft act on birth registration of foreign children and the birth notification system? How did the State party identify stateless persons? Would the State party adopt a law incorporating the 1954 Convention on the Status of Stateless Persons and consider accession to the 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness? Did the State party intend to implement the Committee on the Rights of the Child’s recommendation to extend childcare support to migrant children? Did the State party intend to provide necessary support, such as multilingual counsellors or disability support, for migrant children? Did the State party plan to regularise the status of all children in line with the recommendation from the National Human Rights Commission?
In 2023, 293 children had been placed under “protective custody” in facilities, when immigration authorities issued deportation orders and detention measures against their parents. There had been cases where children were detained for up to 196 days. Would the Republic of Korea continue to issue deportation orders for parents while detaining children under 14 with them? What measures were taken to effectively prohibit the detention of foreign children? What was the status of the adoption of an amendment to the immigration act to limit the detention of foreign children under the age of 14? What measures had been envisaged to extend the scope of this amendment to avoid the detention of all minors?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said systematic support had been established for defectors from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. Those who entered the Republic of Korea received 12 weeks of social adaptation training, settlement funding, rental money and employment support. A national day was established to improve awareness about defectors from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. Any such defector who requested protection from the Republic of Korea would be protected. Once they had acquired the Republic of Korea citizenship, they were given the right to relocate and seek asylum to a third country, if they wished.
The Communications Commission of the Republic of Korea had notified that under relevant laws and regulations, any information found to be discriminatory would be addressed with adequate measures such as a review. There had been a steady influx of migrants to the Republic of Korea with diverse backgrounds. Around 244 family centres and multi-cultural centres nationwide provided language services teaching the language of the Republic of Korea and programmes to help them adapt to life. Migrant children under the age of 14 were in practice not detained. Those between 14 to 18 were awarded temporary release from detention.
When a marriage was terminated, the marriage migrant needed to obtain a status of residence. In determining the fault for the breakdown of a marriage, mediation reports and court judgements were respected. All marriage migrants who were applying for naturalisation had to undergo a survey to validate their marriages, unless they were raising the children of nationals, in which case the survey was not required. There was no distinction in obtaining nationality based on the presence of children.
Several laws on domestic violence applied to foreign nationals and nationals of the Republic of Korea equally. Under the criminal act, trafficking in persons was prohibited. An act was established in 2023 which established separate penalty provisions on sex trafficking and sexual exploitation, penalising crimes on trafficking and exploitation. The crime of trafficking was established with a mandatory prison sentence without the option of a fine, to reflect the severity of the crime.
Several bills had been proposed relating to the birth registration of foreign children, which were now under deliberation in the National Assembly. This allowed those who were born in the Republic of Korea but were not citizens, to have their birth verified and registered in the Republic of Korea by their parents. If a child under 18 was being supported by a foreigner in the Republic of Korea who was detained, they would be given priority consideration for temporary release from detention.
Questions by Committee Experts
STAMATIA STAVRINAKI, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, asked if it was recognised that migrant marriage residents were rights holders, with their own ties to the State? Was it required for residents to earn at least 40 per cent of the national average income?
YEUNG KAM JOHN YEUNG SIK YUEN, Committee Expert and County Co-Rapporteur, said between 2015 to 2020, more than 5,000 Thai workers had died at work. Could the delegation verify this?
A Committee Expert said the issue of women in the Republic of Korea who had been raped by Japanese soldiers had not been addressed. Had there been any effort to identify those at the root of the rapes, particularly those where children were born as a result of the rapes? What had become of these children?
Another Expert asked what steps the State was taking to address the definition of anti-discrimination, particularly since the only issue was the definition of sexual identification?
A Committee Expert applauded the Republic of Korea for including a definition of discrimination within the education system. How effective had the introduction of anti-discrimination been within schools?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said the Government had amended the elementary and secondary education act which governed matters pertaining to education. A support system for students with migrant backgrounds was established. Additional teachers and resources were assigned to schools with a large population of migrant students. Data was being collected on dropout rates and policy support measures were being reviewed accordingly.
Various acts had been developed pertaining to human trafficking, sexual exploitation and transportation of organs, among others. These acts were subject to aggravating penalties.
Those with an income making up 40 per cent of the national income, and was raising a minor child, was provided with basic living. Immigrants who had returned to their home country following the death of their spouse or divorce were provided with resources from the State.
Closing Remarks
FAITH DIKELEDI PANSY TLAKULA, Committee Expert and Follow-up Rapporteur, said several recommendations would be highlighted for follow-up within one year.
STAMATIA STAVRINAKI, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, thanked the delegation and all those who had been involved in the dialogue. The people of the Republic of Korea had consistently stood on the right side of history, fighting for independence, resisting authoritarianism, and defending democracy and the rule of law. Today, the world was at another historic crossroads. It was hoped that once again, the State would choose the right side of history, leading by example in speedily eliminating the policies that raised and sustained racial barriers, and in fully implementing the Committee’s recommendations.
KI HWAN KWEON, Deputy Minister for Multilateral and Global Affairs of the Republic of Korea and head of the delegation, said the delegation of the Republic of Korea expressed sincere gratitude to the Committee for the dialogue. Despite the progress made, the Republic of Korea knew there was more to be done to implement the rights enshrined in the Convention. The Committee’s recommendations would be instrumental in developing policies to protect the rights of foreigners and migrants. The Republic of Korea had contributed 40,000 dollars to the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in support of the Committee’s activities.
_______________
CERD25.006E
Produced by the United Nations Information Service in Geneva for use of the media;
not an official record. English and French versions of our releases are different as they are the product of two separate coverage teams that work independently.