[ad_1]
■ Cast: Lee Jung-mi / Reporter from the Exploration and Planning Team
* The text below may differ from the actual content of the stream, so please check the stream for more accurate information.
[앵커]It was argued that the government’s blocking of the Gwanghwamun demonstration on the opening day of this year was against discrimination. Some argue that only the KCTU concentration was selectively allowed. Let’s review the facts of what the assembly standards ban was and if there were any issues with the app. Reporter Lee Jung-mi from the planning and exploration team is in the studio. First, they claim that it is a discriminatory quarantine. What is the specific content of the discriminatory quarantine?
[기자]There are a wide variety of claims on the Internet. First, on the 3rd, the police installed car walls in the vicinity of the Gwanghwamun rally in Seoul. However, during the Chuseok holidays, the department stores and shopping malls were full of people.
There are also allegations that the police have not banned all reported meetings, but only some. In particular, the claim that only the KCTU rally was selectively allowed appeared even in an internet article. If you look at the screen, it appears now. Among the demonstration reported on the first day of the foundation, 1,159 cases were admitted, but it was a civil union assembly and an article appeared on this content.
[앵커]I will review them one by one. Do you think that the civil union assembly was only selectively allowed on the first day of the foundation?
[기자]It would be a problem if you allowed mounting selectively. This is something that should also be covered in the press. So we did a fact check, but to begin with, it didn’t. On the last day of Liberation, a controversy arose when the Gwanghwamun assembly was banned and the KCTU press conference was allowed. This was definitely not the first day.
I tried to inform the police about the 1,344 demonstrations on the opening day through Han Byeongdo’s office. That’s. If you look here, it’s a forbidden assembly with a red background. If you look at the next chapter, the blue background is the allowed assembly.
Here, I marked a KCTU-related rally with a featured pen. Red prohibited mount includes KCTU mount. Among these allowed blue assemblies, the KCTU was included. So we analyzed the 1,344 cases.
If you look at the screen, we have organized it. Of these 1,344, 185 were banned. However, more than half of them, 111 cases, were related to KCTU. Among the roughly 1,000 assemblies allowed, there were 200 assemblies of the KCTU, but it was confirmed that it was difficult to say that other standards applied.
[앵커]As you just said, if you banned some and allowed some, there should be reasonable standards in the end. There must be a reasonable and objective standard. Was there such an obvious standard?
[기자]Police said there were standards. We previously reported this to the KCTU, but asked if it was true that we had a rally. After listening to that position for a moment, I will explain that part. Let’s hear the story of the KCTU.
There was also a case where the police banned the KCTU meeting. So when I asked the police what the standards were, they explained to me that according to government policy, all assemblies of 10 or more people meeting in any area were prohibited and that meetings with less than 10 people followed the standards. of each local government.
In fact, when we looked at the rally reports we got, there were 104 rallies that brought together more than 10 people, but all of them were banned. Of the 1,240 meetings with fewer than 10 people, 81 were confirmed to be banned. But here we also have a question.
Here the question arises of what standards were allowed and prohibited for gatherings of less than 10 people. As the police banned all gatherings in Jongno and Jung-gu, Seoul, etc., all gatherings were banned, and in Seocho-gu, etc., because places with a high possibility of increasing the number of people were designated as prohibited places, even if less than 10 people were prohibited in the places designated as prohibited places. I explained it like this.
[앵커]According to the police, the standards are different for each district office. This explanation was made, but has it been confirmed as true?
[기자]We had a question, so we reviewed it. I checked with the neighborhood office that it was prohibited. First, I will listen to the ward office and keep talking.
[기자]This foundation is the way to prevent infectious diseases. So when I looked for a way to prevent infectious diseases, the mayor, county chief, or district mayor had a bylaw that allowed the assembly itself to be banned to prevent infectious diseases. If large numbers of people gather and judge that there is a risk of spreading an infectious disease, certain district offices can further strengthen or weaken the rules to prohibit the meetings.
[앵커]There may be controversy.
[기자]In this part, we can also give birth to the interpretation of the prevention of discrimination.
[앵커]But what I’m curious about is that each room can be different, but did the same apply within the room?
[기자]I applied it inside the sphere and it is like that. For example, Jongno or Jung-gu banned all gatherings. Then all the spheres will apply equally. But, for example, Seocho-gu is a place where a lot of people can meet, and if you say that meetings are forbidden, that place is forbidden. In other places, two people hold a press conference, which is also acceptable.
[앵커]Although they are different in distinction, the same policy must have been applied within each neighborhood.
[기자]The same criteria and the same place would have applied. However, those who raise the suspicion of quarantine against discrimination can present this opinion, if it is dangerous if people gather in Jongno-gu and not Jungnang-gu. In this regard, the city and the police are likely to be overcrowded. For example, I reported that there were 2 people, but I could gather more as an spy agent, and if there is such a thing, I explained that I made a decision based on a comprehensive judgment.
So, even in the same one-man protest, there were places that were off limits and some were not considering expanding. Experts noted that a more consistent standard was needed to increase government confidence and allow the public to cooperate with the quarantine. Let’s listen.
In fact, YTN viewers also pointed out. He also said that during the Chuseok holidays, there were too many people in some department stores or shopping centers. Was it appropriate to build a car wall? Even if this controversy aside, considerable public power was put in the vicinity of Gwanghwamun to prevent the demonstration.
[앵커]There were more than 10,000 policemen.
[기자]So is. On the other hand, in other places where people were crowded, such as shopping malls, the public power to administer these things was relatively small, and it is difficult to deny it. So as a result, only the KCTU did not allow the assembly selectively, but there may be criticisms about whether arbitrary judgment can work to set standards or put public power, this was the conclusion of fact-checking.
[앵커]We observe the standards of the assembly, which goes beyond whether freedom of expression comes first or quarantine first. We spoke with reporter Lee Jeong-mi from the planning and exploration team. I will listen to you today. thanks.
