On October 21, 5,206 teachers across the country applied to join political parties, but both the Democratic Party and the People Power Party rejected their applications. Officials from both parties cited current laws as the basis for their refusal.
Under South Korea's National Public Service Act, Article 65 states, "Public officials may not engage in the formation of or join political parties or other political organizations." Additionally, Article 22 of the Political Parties Act specifies that teachers in primary and secondary schools cannot be founders or members of political parties.
In response, the 'Alliance for Teachers' Political Rights' strongly opposed this, stating, "Teachers, as citizens, have the right to join political parties they support and should be able to directly reflect their experiences in education into policy and legislation."
The debate over teachers' political party membership is intense. Here are three key issues fact-checked.
The National Teachers' Union claimed in a press release on October 20 that "South Korea is the only country among OECD nations that completely restricts teachers' basic civic rights." Given the broad nature of the term 'basic civic rights,' we examined the policies of the 38 OECD member countries specifically regarding teachers' political party membership.
Most Western OECD countries, including the United States, the United Kingdom, France, and Germany, do not restrict public officials, including teachers, from joining political parties, and they broadly allow payment of party dues and political donations. Japan also strictly prohibits public officials from engaging in election campaigns and political activities, but it guarantees individual membership in political parties and payment of dues.
However, there are countries like Turkey that completely ban teachers from joining political parties. Turkey's Constitution, Article 68, prohibits public officials, including teachers in public schools, from joining political parties. Private school teachers are also subject to public service and disciplinary regulations, meaning that joining a political party could lead to dismissal. Thus, the claim that South Korea is the only OECD country that prohibits teachers from joining political parties is false. However, considering that only two countries, South Korea and Turkey, fully restrict this right among the 38 member nations, we assess this claim as mostly false.
In April 2019, the National Human Rights Commission stated that "a complete ban on the political freedom of public officials and teachers constitutes a violation of human rights," recommending amendments to the relevant laws. The UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression in 2011, as well as the International Labour Organization's Committee on Freedom of Association in 2015 and 2016, also pointed out that restrictions on teachers' political activities in South Korea are excessive.
Some argue that these recommendations from international organizations and human rights bodies indicate that the ban on teachers joining political parties is unconstitutional.
However, the Constitutional Court has already ruled that the prohibition on teachers joining political parties is constitutional. In April 2020, the court found the vague prohibition on forming or joining "other political organizations" unconstitutional due to a violation of the principle of clarity, but it upheld the core issue of prohibiting membership in political parties and founding parties, citing the need to maintain political neutrality in education and protect students' fundamental rights.
While it is true that there are concerns about violations of fundamental rights and recommendations for improvement from domestic and international human rights organizations, the Constitutional Court, as the final interpreter of the current constitution, has clearly ruled that the prohibition is constitutional. Therefore, the assertion that "the restriction on party membership is unconstitutional" is assessed as mostly false.
Teachers' organizations have stated in a press release that "restricting teachers from imposing specific political views on students is a separate issue from banning teachers' individual party membership," arguing that teachers can maintain political neutrality in the classroom even if they join a political party.
In fact, in Germany, teachers can join political parties and even run for public office, with robust institutional safeguards in place to maintain neutrality in the classroom. The Beutelsbacher Consensus, agreed upon by left- and right-wing educators and parties in 1976, outlines three key principles: 1) Teachers must not impose or indoctrinate specific views on students (prohibition of forced indoctrination), 2) Controversial issues in society must be addressed from multiple perspectives in the classroom (maintaining controversy), and 3) Students should be supported in making their own political judgments (student-centered).
Additionally, laws impose strict obligations on teachers to exercise restraint in their duties, with severe penalties for promoting specific parties or conducting biased lessons.
In contrast, South Korea has been criticized for lacking such effective control mechanisms. While the current Education Basic Act, Articles 6 and 14, declaratively states the prohibition of spreading political bias and the prohibition of guidance or incitement for supporting or opposing specific parties, there are no concrete guidelines or mediation systems that resonate with both conservative and progressive educators, like the Beutelsbacher Consensus. The ban on teachers' political party membership and activities has hindered the establishment of a sophisticated institutional safety net to filter bias in the classroom.
Ultimately, both the arguments for protecting teachers' civic rights and the concerns about political bias in classrooms have valid points. However, these are considerations regarding the 'future effects' and value judgments that may arise after institutional changes, making them unsuitable for fact-checking. Therefore, we reserve judgment on this claim.
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.