Opening to the public vs. Not opening to the public

L.L.F Reporter YiSeul Park
There have been many criticisms regarding the new policy of making the personal information of sex offenders’ public for five years. The policy applies to anyone who has committed a sexual crime two or more times against children or teenagers.
Proponents argue that this system protects children and teenagers from sexual predators. Those opposed to the new regulations insist that it is a form of double punishment and a violation of the criminal’s human rights.
Though this system is already being executed, people still argue over the issue of 'Opening to the public vs. Not opening to the public.'
Supporting view
*The criminal trampled on the victim's human right.
*Until now, Korea has protected the criminal's human rights instead of the victim's human rights. It seems the victim’s human rights have been disregarded.
*Repeat offenses for sexual crimes are very high. Therefore, strong preventative measures are required.
*The victim's human rights are more valuable than criminal's human rights.
Opposition view
*The criminal has human rights.
*Not only the criminal but also their family is branded sex offenders.
*Making private information open to the public is a form of double punishment since the criminals have already served their prison sentence.
*Opening personal information to the public may lead to other crimes.
DU student opinions
-Supporting-
Lee Gang Hyeok (Dept. of Engineering Technology, 03)
Sexual crimes are very bad crimes. Also, the repeat offense ratio is very high. Releasing the criminals private information will help reduce sexual crimes. They were the first to damage other people. They deserve a severe punishment.

Yun Chang Ho (Dept. of Political Science, 06)
When sexual crimes are compared with other crimes, the repeat offense ratio is very high. Also, it is a sin. Before other victims are forced to suffer in silence, we should act by arousing attention through making offenders private data open to the public or requiring them to wear electronic bracelets.
Kim Min Ji (Dept. of Korean Language Education, 06)
We shouldn’t look at sex offenders through jaundiced eyes. But, I think sexual crimes are extremely serious and a violation of human rights. So their assertion is a contradictory opinion. Opening offenders’ personal information to the public is okay because we need to take preventative measures.

-Opposition-
Lee Bo Ra (Dept. of Political Science, 08)
I think sex offender's private data is a form of social capital punishment. They are violent offenders, but they have human rights as members of society (they live in society). Therefore, their private data should not be opened to the public. Opening their data brands them for life and also damages their family.

Nam Gyeong Min (Dept. of French Language, 07)
I already know about this system. It first started in the United States. But the crime rate there is as high as ever. I saw many people who fell victim to terrorism because their private data was made open to the public on the internet. Having seen this, I think opening private data to the public is information abuse.

Do Hyeon Jung (Dept. of Psychology, 08)
It is not right that private data is made open to the public. We need to take conscious measures to prevent these types of crimes. But this system has many controversial points. First, it is a form of double punishment. Second, it damages the offender's family. I think that this system abuses the offender’s human rights and causes a different social controversy.

INFORMATION - Examples of the policy in other countries
Unites States:
*Texas /The state government attaches a board on the sex offender's yard and window with the sentence ’Sex offender, beware.'
*Colorado / From 1998, the government of the state gives a medicine to sex offenders which decreases their sexual desire.
*Florida / Criminal cases that involve sexual assaults against children below 11 years-old have a minimum jail sentence of 25years. And after offenders are released from prison, they are required to wear an electronic bracelet.
Certain parts of Europe: Some countries have legalized castration of sex offenders. (Ex. Germany, Norway...)
Taiwan: Data of those that perpetrate sexual crimes against teenagers is opened to the public through the press.