On Oct. 15 when there was the National Assembly Administration and Security committee inspection on the Jeju Island government at the Island government hall, many people including village elders gathered in its yard to show their determination against the naval base project and to demand the Assembly thorough inspection on the Island government and revocation of the Jeju naval base project, from 9am to 5pm. Beside anti-base groups, there was also protest by a pro-base group in much small numbers. No physical conflict between them. Still the Island government bullying on the anti-base group people, did not even allow them to put a banner on the ground of yard in the beginning. However, people persisted to carry on peaceful 300 bows there. Picketing, songs, dances, and grafting went all day.
The below is an excerpt translation of people’s press conference statement read in front of the Jeju Island government hall upon the start of the National Assembly inspection on the Jeju Island government on Oct. 15. Original Korean statement can be seen here.
[People’s press conference statement on Oct. 15] ‘CNFK intervention, false civilian-military dual complex harbor, human rights violation: Revoke the Jeju naval base project that destroys the future of the Jeju!’
Since the Gangjeong village has been decided as the Jeju naval base project-targeted area five years six months ago, the ROK navy is enforcing construction (destruction) inputting project cost of more than 200 billion won. [..]
Two biggest issues have been disclosed in the National Assembly inspection on the government offices this time.
The one is on a clear proof that the US military has intervened in the Jeju naval base construction. As seen in the construction specifications, the CNFK (Commander of the US Navy Forces, Korea) has demanded [the ROK navy] a base design in which [US] nuclear-powered aircraft carrier and nuclear-powered submarine can enter. (*See here or here)
Not to mention that the construction cost is added with about 150 billion won due to dredging and mooring facility to fit the water depth for nuclear-powered aircraft carrier and nuclear submarine, we reconfirmed the will of the United States that wants to aggressively intervene in the conflict on the maritime order in the Northeast Asia. Our concern that the Jeju Island would be the scapegoat of the supremacy competition between China and the United States turned out to be more and more realistic.
The other point is that it has come in evidence with that the Government has glossed over as if it would build a beautiful tourism port while it builds the port, in fact, only as a military port.
Scandal is being raised with the public exposure of the meeting minutes by the technical verification committee under the Prime Minister Office, in which even a government officer’s self-scorning remark was even made public, that ‘the [government] has [originally] made the base design as a military port then is to forcibly put cruises, that is why [the committee cannot prove that that cruise works in the projected base through its simulation test]. Still the remarks by the government side that intends to enforce construction by all means without the change of base design flowed in the meeting minutes. Further it turned out that the government has enforced only construction (destruction), glossing over as if the simulation report that is not the government official but has been done by the ROK Maritime University to which the Samsung C & T has privately requested and that was done even before the formation of the technical verification committee is the report that is considered of all of the claims by the Jeju Island government (* which has constantly demanded to the central government on the Jeju civilian-military complex tour beauty where two 150,000 ton cruises are supposedly to enter, The people not only oppose the idea but think it is a nonsense) [..]
Even though the navy has stated that it would use the southern sea and large size maritime shooting range nearby the Chuja Island as a shooting training by maneuvering flotilla, the maritime and fisheries bureau of the Jeju Island government is not raising any inquiry on it. The arms that are used by maneuvering flotilla have much different quality level from the machine gun–level arms that are currently used by the Jeju Defense Headquarter. Also, what will happen in the maritime ecology of that areas called ‘golden fish bank’ in case there are torpedo and anti submarine bomb training not to mention naval bombardment training in that maritime shooting training? [..]
Also the air force is openly stating that it would drive for search and rescue air force base with the development of the new Jeju airport. [..]
Woo Keun-Min, the Island governor should have no more fantasy on the local development with the naval base construction that has been full of expedient method, law-evasiveness and illegality. [..]
The navy should not extort the sacrifice of the Jeju Island people with its concession project under the mask of so called security. It should return back to its duty for true security placing the management on the southern sea transportation route and Ieodo (Rock not island) water area to the coast guard, the proper group for such duty.
Oct. 15, 2012
The Gangjeong village Association
The Jeju Pan-Island Committee for Sop of Military Base and for Realization of Peace Island
The National Network of Korean Civil Society for Opposing to the Naval Base in Jeju Island
Photo sent by Toshio Takahashi (For more photos, click here) ‘In the afternoon on the 5th of September 2012, I and two of my friends, Mr. Masahiro Tomiyama and Mr. Eiji Tomita, were prohibited entry into Republic of Korea (ROK) at the Incheon International Airport.’ (source)
Update: April 24, 2013, Wang Yu-Hsuan (Taiwan), 21st subject to be denied entry to Korea, in relation to the Jeju naval base project. Since the inauguration of Park Geun-Hye government, she is the 2nd human rights defender to be deported after Ban Hideyuki, Citizens’ Nuclear Information Center, Japan, on April 19, 2013.(see here)
Update: [IUCN letter to Dr. Imok Cha, Nov. 13, 2012] IUCN so regrets the decision for The ROK governmentnot not to allow Dr. Imok Cha (Fwd) : CLICK HERE
Update: A Japanese peace activist has been denied entry at the Gimpo Airport, Seoul, on Oct. 16, 2012 when he was to visit his sick friend. Mr. Koto Shoji has visited Gangjeong last year and has written an article on it in the magazine named “Power of People’.With his forcefully denied entry, the total numbers of people who have been denied entry, related to the Jeju naval base project have become at least 20. 3 of them have been repeatedly denied entries.
………………………………………………………………
The below summary is primarily based on the Korean summaries here and here. Please come by later for any fix, revision or update. ( See the original post here)
Summary on the matter of entry denial against internationals, Regarding the issue of the Jeju naval base project
: Report as of Oct. 3, 2012
(1) Preface
On Sept. 25, 2012, PSPD (People’s Solidarity for Peace and Democracy) issued a press release that the ROK government denied to make public the reasons of entry denial against the targeted internationals. See the Korean document here and summary of it in No. (2).
The numbers of international activists who were denied entry to Korea, related to the Jeju naval base project have been at least 15 from Aug. 26, 2011 to June 29, 2012. See the Korean document here.
However, it was not precedent that as many as 9 people were denied entry to Korea and deported during the WCC period (Sept. 6 to 15, 2012), beginning with Dr. Cha Imok on Sept. 3. Therefore the numbers of entry denial related to the Jeju naval base project have become at least 24. See the Korean document here.
Please see No. (5) for the details of list of the internationals who were denied entry from Aug. 26, 2011 to Sept. 6, 2012.
Among 24, it is still uncertain whether two Nigerians who were denied entry on Sept. 6 had the will against the naval base. 3 of 9 people had to go through repeated entry denials (Yagi Ryuji, a Japanese peace activist, Tomiyama Masahiro, an Okinawa peace activist and Umisedo Yutaka, an Okinawa musician)
During the period of the WCC co-sponsored by the IUCN, at least two people were official IUCN nation representative or member and four people carried the invitation letters and identity certification letter from a ROK National Assembly woman.
Even though excluded of two Nigerians and repeated entry denial numbers, the international personnel who have been denied entry to Korea then deported, related to the Jeju naval base project currently enforced in the Gangjeong village, despite the opposition by the majority of villagers, have become at least 19 from Aug. 26, 2011 to Sept. 6, 2012 (One Korean American, three from the United States and 15 from Japan and Okinawa)
It should be noted that it is a matter of serious human rights violation internationally committed by the current Lee Myung-Bak government, Republic of Korea, which disrespects the UN human rights chapter and other international agreements, as well as domestic laws and regulations. Above all, it was confirmed that the government has made and is operating a black list against some internationals. The suspicion on the police’s illegal information collection on the foreigners in the Gangjeong village is also being raised. (See (4)-14).
Further international investigation should be earnestly looked for regarding this matter so that constructive and positive measures should come out.
This report is merely a summary and we hope any concerned Korean associated groups or international institutes pay attention to this matter and work on it.
Any corrections and added facts will be updated here.
Gangjeong village international team
……………………………………………………………………………
(2) PSPD Press Release on Sept. 25, 2012
According to the PSPD press release on Sept. 25, titled, the “Government being consistent not to make public the reasons of entry denial on international activists,” the Ministry of Justice has sent one page reply on Sept. 18 to the 7 page open inquiry letter by the PSPD on the entry denial of international activists on Sept. 6. See here.
In summary, the PSPD press release reads that: 1.The basis of information collection to prohibit the entry of overseas activists for the reasoning of “past works” is opaque, 2. The ambiguous basis to prohibit the entry of the overseas activists does not fit to the international human rights standard.
The Ministry of National Justice saying that “the foreigners who have been denied entry to Korea were judged to ‘deem likely to commit any act detrimental to national interests of the Republic of Korea or public safety, in the reflection of their past works,” totally refused replies to the inquires. It said “The entry denial measure to specific foreigners is the nation’s sovereign discretionary act and in case when its detailed contents are to be known, there is concern that there might occur foreign diplomatic matter or trouble in the government institutes’ activities to protect the national interest.”
The PSPD Press release reads that:
“To prohibit the entry of overseas activists without clear basis is a violation of the UN Human Rights statement that states that ‘everyone has the right individually or in association with others, to promote and to strive for the protection and realization of human rights and fundamental freedoms at the national and international levels’ ( *article 1 of the Right and Responsibility of Individuals, Groups, and Organs of Society to Promote and Protect Universally Recognized Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, UN) and of the agreement on the civic political rights that prohibits dealing with citizens as potential criminals.
Claiming that the Lee Myung Bak government is infringing the freedom on the peaceful rally and assembly by the international human rights defenders who take opposing opinion against the government, the PSPD says it will make public opinion on the issue of oppression on the international activists through the examination on the Universal Periodic Review on human rights in coming October.
……………………………………………………………………………
(3) Noticeable points of the human rights violation by the South Korean immigration office
1. The Korean Immigration Office’s entry denial of some internationals regarding the Jeju naval base project has been earnestly practiced since August, 2011.
Case: On Aug. 26, 2011, when an entry-denied Japanese peace activist asked when she has become the subject of entry denial to Korea, a Korean immigration office replied her it was since August, [2011]. See AWC (Asian Wide Campagn)_Japan statement on Aug. 28, here.
2. Internationals are denied entries merely for the fact that they have visited the Gangjeong village ‘for tour,’ in the past or merely for the Immigration Office’s ‘presumption’ that they might visit the village.
Case 1: Nakamura Sugae who was denied entry along with her college student daughter on March 26, 2012, says, “Regarding my visit to the Gangjeong village, Jeju, I have dropped by a village and talked with villagers for a short time on my way of group tour last August, which was guided by my daughter who was an exchange student in a Korean traditional medical college in Daeku then. That was all. I haven’t joined protest but wanted to learn one another there. [The entry denial] is totally nonsense. [..] Further the visit this time was to drop by the Daejeon-Choongchung nam-do province, nothing to do with the Jeju.” She has applied the visa to the Korean Consulate in Japan again on July 31 to visit the Independence Museum, Cheonan in Choongchung nam-do on Aug. 22. However, despite her appeal to cancel the entry prohibition measure against her, she saying that she ‘would never visit the Jeju Island, she did not receive any reply from the Consulate even after 9 days. It was found later that she had been labeled as the ‘[Korea]-entry-prohibited,’ by the Lee Myung-Bak government.
Case 2: On June 15, Arime Yuuri (25), an Okinawa peace activist, was denied entry. She had visited Gnagjeong with an Okinawa Broadcasting Co. for a short time. But it is told that she had not planned to include the visit to Gangjeong this time. She just wanted to watch the Korean baseball game and to meet her friends in Korea. (See here)
3. The Korean Immigration Office openly expresses that it denies their entry for the reason that they have visited the Gangjeong village in the past. The reasoning is nothing to do with their visit purpose at their entry-denied time.
Case: Nakamura Sugae stated on March 29, 2012, through her phone interview with the Ohmynews, a Korean independent media, that “an immigration officer in the entry-checking desk of the Busan International Terminal said that I, [Nakamura], cannot enter Korea since I had visited the village last August therefore violated the Korean law.” It should be noted that there is no legal basis that visiting the village is the violation of Korean laws. Further Nakamura had no purpose to visit the village in the Jeju Island but to visit the Choongchung South Province for tour and forum purpose on March 27, 2012 when she was denied entry to Korea, along with her college student daughter. (Please see here.)
4. Some of the entry denied internationals were labeled from the outset as the ‘entry-prohibited,’ by the Korean government.
Case 1: On its July 2, 2012 statement, AWC_Japan stated that as many as 7 of its members and their family members seem to have been labeled as the ‘entry-prohibited’ to Korea by the Korean government. See here.
Case 2: On Sept. 5, Toshio Takahashi got the words from the Korean Immigration Officer that “you are applicable to the entry-prohibition. I don’t know the reason. The Ministry of Justice has just contacted us so you should exit out of the country, when he was denied entry in the Incheon airport on the day.’ (Toshio Takahashi’s letter to the Hankyoreh, Sept. 9, 2012) See here.
5. The entry-denial is being suspected to be practiced under the international mutual cooperation by the individual government institutes.
Case 1: The AWC_Japan statement on July 2 reads that the Japanese and South Korea police have exchanged information on the targeted subjects for the entry-denial before an international conference. See here.
Case 2: When Tarak Kauff, Eliott Adams, and Mike Hastie were met by South Korean authorities when they landed on Jeju Island [or in the departure airplane to it], the ‘South Korean authorities had a photo of each of them in their hands and told them they would not be allowed to enter Jeju Island.’ See here.
6. Sometimes the visa procedures are intentionally delayed to the obstruction of entry.
Case: On Jan. 28, a representative of BAYAN, Philippine was frustrated to enter Korea since the Korean Immigration Office had prolonged the issuing of visa for him and had not eventually issued the visa until the planned day. See AWC_Japan’s Jan. 30 statement, here.
7. There is neither a reasonable explanation, nor a letter-form notice but irresponsible answer that the entry-denied internationals should hear the reasons in the overseas Korean Embassy or Consulates.
Case 1: On Jan. 27, 2012, an immigration officer said to Ikeda Takane, Secretary of AWC_Japan, that “you have become the subject of entry-prohibition since you oppose the Korean government policy.” (See here)
Case 2: On March 31, 2012, a colleague of Yagi Ryuji, a Japanese peace activist inquired to the Immigration office why Yagi was denied entry on the day. The only reply he got was that “You know well.” (See here)
8. Lie is used for the reasoning of entry denial.
Case: The Korean immigration office denied entry of Dr. Cha Imok on Sept. 3, 2012. One of the main reasons that the Office took was that Dr. Cha had joined rally in the Washington D. C. However, it was confirmed that Dr. Cha has never joined it. Her home is in California, far from the Washington D. C. ( See the Commentary by the National Organizing Committee for Opposing the Jeju Naval Base Project, on Sept. 7 (here) and Ohmynews interview with Dr. Cha on Sept. 12 (here)
9. The Korean Immigration Office denies the subject of the chance to file for a different opinion. Further it lies to the subject that there is no such chance.
Case: The AWC_Japan statement on Aug. 28, 2011 reads: ‘When two members of AWC-Japan, who were denied entry on Aug. 26, 2011 asked the ROK Immigration workers, “Please let us informed of the way since we want to file a different opinion to the ROK Minister of Justice,” the workers replied to them that, “there is no such way. You cannot but return back to your country,” and “ask to the ROK embassy or Consulate in Japan after your return.” However it was a big lie. During the talk with them, one of the two members had a chance to talk with a lawyer of the KCTU (Korean Confederation of Trade Unions) who said the two can report on different opinion. It means the ROK, Republic of Korea, the democratic country, robs of even a chance for opposing opinion, hides and even lies on it. Isn’t it an infringement on human rights done by the workers of the Japanese Immigration Office as well?”
10. The Korean Immigration Office demanded signs to the entry-denied internationals that they should return back to their countries with their own money according to the immigration law.
Case: On Aug. 26, 2012, the Korean Immigration Office demanded Sakoda Hideumi(46), his son(6) and Yamaguchi Yukiko(56, woman), coordinator of west regional branch of AWC, that they should do such signs. The two AWC-Japan members refused to sign it. (See here)
11. The Korean Immigration Office brought in a private airplane company worker as a translator.
Case: The AWC_Japan and Korea, Jeju Regional branch of the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions and Pan-Island Committee for the Stop of Military Base and for Realization of Peace Island say in its Aug. 28 statement regarding the entry denial of two AWC_Japan members on Aug. 26 that “the conversation between the two members and Immigration Office workers were processed through a Korean translator. The Immigration Office employed K, an Asiana airplane co. worker as a Japanese translator, since there was no person who could speak Japanese among the Immigration Office workers. K did not precisely deliver but summarized the two members’ words. Sometimes K mixed one’s own subjective viewpoint or opinion in doing that. It was a clear example of how the Korean government considers the human rights of international people.’ (See here)
12. The Korean Immigration Office dared to commit detention and forceful repatriation.
Case1: According to a report by Heo Young-Ku, representative of the AWC_Korea, Ikeda Takae, Secretary of International dept., AWC_Japan who was denied entry on Jan. 27 , 2012, stated as the below:
When I was in the waiting room (around 5:50pm), two men who self-claimed ‘Korean Airline workers,’ came to me. One spoke Japanese well. Even though they used polite words in the beginning, saying, ‘you might return back to Japan by a 7pm airplane,’ their words gradually became oppressive. That is why I became to know they are NOT the Korean airline workers. They looked like the airport police. When I said to them, “I will not return back to Japan, allow me to enter Korea,” they and Immigration Office workers tried to cheat me, saying, “There is a room where you can sleep in the upper floor so let’s move to there.” When I rejected them, Immigration Office worker(s) were trying to drag me. It was very forcing. I resisted hanging to chair. Later, so called a ‘Korean Airline worker’ who speak Japanese threatened me saying, ‘You should return back to Japan. If you persist, we should call the police.” It repeated many times then around 6:30pm, four more workers joined the ‘Korean Airline worker,’ therefore total six people grabbing my two arms, two legs and two armpits, forcibly dragged me from the office. Even though I protested in loud voice, very strongly resisting, they rook me toward a bus to an airplane, with my body being lifted in the air (except for the elevator time). Finally they forcefully boarded me in an airplane KE 721 around 7pm then took me a forced deportation. (See here)
Case 2: It is told that Yamaguchi Yukiko has been under detention in the Jeju airport when she made a sit-in in protest for 3 days since she was denied entry on Aug. 26, 2011. She was forcefully deported on Aug. 28. She was also demanded to pay her own meals during the sit-in (See here)
Case 3: It is told that Mike Hastie, a member of the Veterans for Peace, United States, was forcefully dragged out from a plane to Jeju in 10 minutes he boarded in and detained in the room of the Korean Immigration Office.
# On the same day, Benjamin Monnet (32), a French citizen who had been falsely charged for his activities opposing the naval base project was forcefully relocated to the detention center for foreigners in Hwaseong, Gyunggi province (He was forcefully and inhumanly deported soon under the injunction order) and Angie Zelter(61), a UK citizen and a Nobel Peace laureate has also gotten order of exit from the Korean Immigration Office for her activities to stop the base project.
Case 4: Toshio Takahashi who was denied entry along with two others on Sept. 5, 2012: ‘Officials from the immigration and Asiana Airlines ordered me and my friends to get on the Asiana OZ-136 plane departing at 5.20pm for Fukuoka. We were forcefully dragged out of the immigration office by six or seven male officials. Our passports were returned once they confirmed our identifications on board.’ (See here)
13. A series of infringement on human rights violation and inhuman deeds have been done. One of them is finger print, taking photos of faces etc.
Case 1: On the 5th of September, three of us left the Naha International Airport by Asiana Airline OZ-171 at 12.40pm, and arrived at the Incheon International Airport around 2.45pm. We showed our passports for a visa approval in front of immigration window. However, the immigration official turned his head, looked at the computer screen, and then asked us to go to the immigration office while handing us back passports. Two female officials were at the immigration office, and one of them asked again for passports from each of us, collected finger-prints from hands, and took photo of faces. (See here )
Case 2: For Dr. Cha Imok, it has not even been allowed to meet her elderly parents(90 and 88 years old)
See the note on Sept. 3 here.
Case 3: Japanese peace activists who entered the Incheon airport at 2:40 pm, Sept. 5, were carrying the invitation letter and identity certification issued by Jang Hana, member of the Democratic United Party. They demanded the related authority to explain them persuasive reasons for their entry denial and expressed their opinions that they would stay in the airport until the next day morning since Jang’s Office was looking for the solution. However, they were forcefully deported via an airplane to Japan at 5:20pm.
(Commentary by the National Organizing Committee, Sept. 7. See here.)
One of them was Toshio Takahashi from Okinawa who said he cannot accept that the Korean Immigration Office would send him to a site apart from Okinawa and demanded that he want to hear the entry-denial reason from the ROK Ministry of Justice. He says, “I insisted that being deported back to cities far from my original departure is not acceptable. Also, I added that the Ministry of Justice should inform us in a letter explaining the reason of forbidding our entry into the country and demanded for Japanese interpreter. But the employee from Asiana Airlines simply dismissed my requests and said this is the “Korean system”, which was by no means convincing answer.’ (See here.)
Jang Hana, the National Assembly woman complained later. ‘I contacted an Immigration Officer in the airport to see one of those denied entries, saying that ‘I invited them and I want to apologize them.’ But [the Immigration Office] intentionally moved up his air plane schedule at 6:05pm while it was possible that he could return back by 7:30pm airplane. (Jang’s interview on Sept. 10)
14: It was confirmed that the government black list exists. Suspicion is also raised that there is an illegal investigation against the foreigners.
Case 1: The fact of visiting Gangjeong village is merely a personal activity and it does not even remain in the official record. Still the thing that the Korean authority denies entry against the foreigners for the reason of “visiting to the Gangjeong village,’ is a certain proof that illegal investigation on the foreigners by government institute is being done. (Jang Hana’s commentary on Sept. 6)
Case 2: Jang Hana, a member of the Democratic United Party said that persons who have never visited the village are included among the entry-denied international activists. It means that not only routine investigation on the international activists by the Lee Myung Bak government is being done but also a black list exists.[..] It is an example of infringement on human rights that the government ignored the recommendation of the nation human rights committee that says it to positively protect the human rights of the foreigners who were denied entries. (Commentary by the National Organizing committee on Sept. 7)
Case 3: A person of the Ministry of Justice stated that it ‘is making and operating a list of foreigners who violates national interest or are threat to safety.” But he/she did not tell at all on the specific standards on the prohibition of entry denial. (Hankyoreh article, Sept. 10, that introduced a letter by Toshio Takahashi)
Case 4: ‘There is a common point of people who were denied entries. They are the people who have made solidarity with the Gangjeong village, with personal or group purpose. A suspicion is raised that illegal information collection by the police has even been applied to the foreigners in the Gangjeong village, given that personnel who came personally are in the government list for entry control.’ ( Kim Mi-Hwa’s interview with Jang Hana, National Assembly woman, on Sept. 10)
Case 5: ‘The immigration office workers openly say that “we know that you have worked in the Gangjeong village. We know what you have done entering Korea. And you are in the black list.” Here, the official name of black list is ‘the name list on the entry-controlled people,’ managed by the Ministry of Justice. However, the list is originally on the terrorists, people who have committed crimes in Korea, or people who have joined an international crimes such as smuggling. The government should make an official explanation on why the NGO activists are being dealt with like criminals for the reason that they have done peace activities and should make apology to them.’ (Kim Mi-Hwa’s interview with Jang Hana, National Assembly woman, on Sept. 10.See here.)
15. Suspicion on domestic email hacking is being raised.
Case: ‘Given that four speakers for the symposium [ on the environmental matter due to the US bases in the East Asia] have been denied entries and the symposium-hosting Korean groups are of the anti-war/ peace movement, we even think that emails exchanged by people might have been hacked.’ (Kim Mi-Hwa’s interview with Jang Hana, National Assembly woman, on Sept. 10. See here.)
16. The victims of the denied entry do not have protection measures from their own governments. Not only domestic pressure but international measure on the infringement of such human rights is urgent.
Case: ‘I called the Japanese embassy in Seoul (the respondent was named Mr. Shinsaka) around 15:14pm. I told him that my entry was being prevented, I was not noticed with reasons, and I was carrying an invitation letter and identity certificate. But he hanged off my phone, saying, “If you are in the stage before receiving the notice on the entry denial, please call again once you receive the notice.”
Since it was clear that the ROK Ministry of Justice was clearly denying my entry, I called him again around 16:05pm and told him process, asking him whether he working in the embassy can take any measures since it was an infringement on human rights that I was to be forcefully deported without a proper document from the ROK Ministry of Justice and explanation of reason for denial. However, Mr. Shinsaka replied me that the entry denial is by the judgment and authority of the ROK government, there was nothing the Japanese government can do.” ( A letter by Toshio Takahashi, Sept. 6, 2012)
15. Even the request by a National Assembly member for the resource material to the Ministry of Justice is being shunned.
Case: ‘Regarding [Sept. 6] incident, we (* Office of Jang Hana, a member of Environment and Labor committee, National Assembly) made a request for resource material to the Ministry of Justice. But the Ministry was not cooperative. Instead it said that we should request it after we get the stamp by Park Young-Sun, Democratic United Party, and a Chairwoman of the Legal Affairs committee, National Assembly, which was totally nonsense. It seems the Ministry must very strongly hide something. I hope that the members of the legal affairs committee clearly make public on that matter. (Kim Mi-Hwa’s interview with Jang Hana, National Assembly woman, on Sept. 10)
16. The ROK government’s serious infringement on human rights of the internationals is considered as its fear for the international exposure of the oppression on human rights being placed in the Gangjeong village (See here)
Case : ‘[ToshioTakahashi] said, “ It was for the first time for me. I have visited Korea more than 10 times by now.” He was suspecting whether his visit this February when the opposition activities against the Jeju naval base was at the peak caused him to be denied entry. He said, “It is an oppression being done by the ROK government since it feels burden that infringement on human rights being placed in the Gangjeong village is to be internationally exposed.” (Toshio Takahashi’s letter to the Hankyoreh, Sept. 9. See here. )
17. It was not only in cases related to the Gangjeong village. There have been about 463 people who were denied for unknown reasons, according to an article (May 28, 2012). Even the high ranking members of Green peace, and a Japanese activist who was invited by the Seoul Metropolitan government were denied entries.
Case1: [On April 2, 2012] Three of [four high-ranking members of Greenpeace] – its Korean manager and East Asia leaders – were denied entry and ordered to return to Hong Kong. Only Greenpeace International executive director Kumi Naidoo was admitted to the country. They were not told why they were banned. They guessed the reason may be the group’s anti-nuclear campaign, running counter the Korean government’s plan to expand atomic power generation. “But Greenpeace has not conducted a single activity yet except for a campaign (against nuclear power). Korea is the only country that has banned Greenpeacers though no activity has been launched,” Rashid Kang, manager for Greenpeace Seoul, said.
Case 2: The Ministry of Justice has denied a total of 8,203 people entry to Korea from October to April 2. The lion’s share of cases involved false-name passports, uncertain purpose of stay or those without places to stay.What observers find problematic are the 463 people who were denied for reasons unknown. They claim that the authorities are abusing the law to screen out civic or labor activists from holding campaigns against the government.
Case 3: In 2011, the authorities banned entrance of Japanese civic activist, Matsumoto Hajime, who was invited by the Seoul Metropolitan Government. Hajime shot to the fame for starting several nonviolent protests against the government. But since he was invited by a city government, many called the decision bizarre. “We have asked the ministry to figure out why Hajime could not get into the event but we were told nothing,” said a member of Haja center, a youth job training facility operated by Seoul City. “We are concerned that there is no clear guideline to the regulation. Simply opposing government policies does not constitute denial or prohibition,” an official of the Center for Freedom of Information and Transparent Society said. None were clearly informed of the reason why they were denied entry into Korea.
(See the article at http://www.asiaone.com/News/AsiaOne+News/Asia/Story/A1Story20120528-348805.html )
18. Victims as well as their colleagues who have accompanied them appeal for mental shock after their colleagues being denied entries.
Case1: [On March 14, 2012], two US veterans, both members of Veterans For feace, were asked to come by the people [in Gangjeong village]. Elliott Adams and Tarak Kauff responded to the request by traveling for 2 days from New York to Shanghai to Jeju, including 19 hours in the air. But when they got off the plane they were rudely told by the Korean government (not the Jeju government) that they must leave. Tarak Kauff says, “they were waiting for us, they had our photos as we arrived on the plane.” The veterans were left with little money, just tickets home that would not be good for a week. “This is gratitude. I served in Korea with the 2nd Infantry Division defending the people from North Korea, I come back to again defend the people and I am pushed off into no-man’s-land,” said Elliott Adams . (See here)-
Case 2: Nakamura Sugae who was denied entry along with her college student daughter on March 27, 2012, later appealed to the Omynews. “Further it was a visit to Daejeon and Choongnam province, nothing to do with Jeju. “I cannot understand the ROK government measure of entry denial, and I can hardly forgive it because I am so infuriated. I was shocked because I couldn’t imagine it. If I could, I want to appeal not only to Korea but also to the whole world.” (See Ohmynews, March 29, here)
Case 3: Nakamura Sugae’s colleague, Hasegawa, who was left alone for the entry denial of two could not but visit Daejeon alone in the afternoon of March 29. Hasegawa said, “All the programs have been prepared for by Nakamura who was denied entry. I got tremendous shock since I became to be left alone.” Hasegawa even had tears, saying that “It was for the first time for me to land on Korea. I could not read Koreans and could not figure out directions.” (See Ohmynews, March 29, here)
19. In conclusion, it is a clear infringement on human rights.
Case: The AWC_Japan has stated in its statement on Jan. 30, 2012
1.The ROK Korean Immigration Office does not make public entry denial reason(s) 2. It does not acknowledge the entry-denied people’s right to file on different opinion. 3. It repeats threat to the victims, saying lots of lies for forceful deportation of those. 4. Finally, it boards the subject(s) on planes with violent methods and forcefully deports. Those are clearly infringement on human rights.’ (See here)
20. The ROK Ministry of Justice is consistent in its arrogant and arbitrary position.
Case 1: The Ministry of Justice admitted that the rules can be ambiguous. “We cannot specify all the details about who cannot come and who can. We are capable of discerning detrimental figures,” a ministry official said. “We don’t need to disclose our criteria either, even to the person him or herself. There is no rule forcing us to. We are abiding by the rules. Besides, they all know why Korea does not want them anyway.” (See here.)
Case 2: The Korean Immigration Office having a call with the Bupyung Shinmoon on April 20 said that “The decision on the entry denial is registered not only by us but also by the Minister of the Ministry of Justice who decides that [the subject(s)] are detrimental to the national interest of ROK,” and “[The subjects] could be denied entry not only by us but if prosecutor, police and taxation office request. If their activities are not exact, it is possible to deny their entries. The entry-denial is established according to the demand(s) by the related department(s), if something is seen against the national interest of ROK.” (See here)
(4) Measures Taken
1. The AWC_Japan has driven the Korea-Japan joint statement, along with the AWC_Korea, to demand the withdrawal of entry-prohibition measure in August, 2011.
2. On Jan. 18, 2012, the both above filed a suit to the National Human Rights Commission of ROK, adding the signs by 394 civic activists from the both countries of ROK and Japan who demanded the withdrawal of unjust entry-prohibition measure (See AWC_Japan statement on Jan. 30, 2012, here)
3. The Center for Freedom of Information ( http://www.opengirok.or.kr/ ) has requested the Ministry of Justice, detailed contents including the nationality and entry denial reason of the targeted foreigners from Oct. 2011 to April 2, 2012. However, the Ministry of Justice has not made public those, reasoning that it would impede the diplomatic relationships. (See here.)
4. The village stated in its March 15 statement that denounces the ROK government’s entry denial of three members of Veterans for U.S., as well as its’ injunction of Benjamin Monnet, France and deportation of Angie Zelter, UK, saying that: “The oppression on the international activists is a mean and barbarous oppression to break down the chains of struggle against the Jeju naval base project against which international solidarity has been vital. In its statement on March 15, as well as on April 2 when a Japanese peace activist was denied entry on March 31, it claimed that the ROK government should make clear on what legal basis, it has taken measures on the prohibition of entry denial and on injunction order against them. It also claimed that the ROK government should make apology to the related groups and overseas civic societies, not to mention the victimized international peace activists, while taking measure for compensation and prevention on repetition. (See here)
5. On July 2, 2012, the AWC_Japan has demanded the both governments of ROK and Japan to make public all the lists of unjust entry prohibition and strongly demanded making public of all the information and officially withdrawing of the lists. It also demanded to stop construction, saying the scheme of the Jeju naval base project is to destroy environment, community, as well as to heighten the military tension in the North East Asia. The AWC_Japan has been carrying out regular protest in front of the Korean Consulate in Osaka.
6. As mentioned in (2), PSPD issues a press release on Sept. 25, titled, the “Government being consistent not to make public the reasons of entry denial of international activists,” the Ministry of Justice has sent one page reply on Sept. 18 to the 7 page open inquiry letter by the PSPD on the entry denial of international activists on Sept. 6. See here.
(5) Detailed records of the international activists who have been denied entries by the Korean government
Dr. member of the Emergency Action to Save Jeju Island. A consultant to the Center for Human and Nature, IUCN member group, a speaker for a Knowledge Cafe program, Sept. 7, WCC participant
Update: [IUCN letter to Dr. Imok Cha, Nov. 13] IUCN so regrets the decision for The ROK governmentnot not to allow Dr. Imok Cha (Fwd) : Click HERE
[2] Sept. 5, 2012
_Yagi Ryuji, a Japanese peace activist, Jeju airport, arriving Incheon airport at 2:40pm.
A speaker for the international symposium on the environment matters by the US bases in the East Asia, Incheon airport. He was carrying invitation letters and identification certification issued by Jang Hana, a National Assembly woman
_Tomita Eiiji, Takahashi Toshio, Tomiyama Masahiro, three Okinawa peace activists, arriving Incheon airport at 2:40pm.
Three speakers for the international symposium on the environment matters by the US bases in the East Asia, Incheon Airport. They were carrying invitation letters and identification certification issued by Jang Hana, a National Assembly woman
[3] Sept. 6, 2012: 4
-Umisedo Yutaka, Okinawa, Japanese representative of the IUCN
Okinawa musician, a member of Hallasan Association and Save Dugong Campaign, a member group of the IUCN
– Matsushima Yuske, Japan, a member of the Save Dugong Campaign, a member group of the IUCN group
– Unidentified two Nigerians, WCC participants
– It is still uncertain whether they had the will to oppose the Jeju naval base project.
……………………………………………….
Reference
A Summary of United Nations Agreements on Human Rights
http://cafe.daum.net/peacekj/I51g/628
[Toshio Takahashi] A report on the South Korean govt’s refusal to allow entry of 3 Okinawa Peace Activists (delegates to the IUCN WCC)
Thurs. Sept. 6, 2012
http://space4peace.blogspot.kr/2012/09/push-turns-to-shove.html
Sept. 14, 2012
PUSH TURNS TO SHOVE
World’s largest environmental organization in ethical quandary:
Should it answer to conference sponsors Samsung and Korean government, or it to its historical mission to protect environment and social justice?
http://cafe.daum.net/peacekj/I51g/753
[IUCN letter to Dr. Imok Cha, Nov. 13] IUCN so regrets the decision for The ROK governmentnot not to allow Dr. Imok Cha (Fwd)
The following motion was submitted to the IUCN WCC Jeju 2012 Motions Committee. It has 34 co-sponsors, reportedly the most in WCC history.
TO: Motions Committee
FROM: Kathryn Kintzele, Esq. Director, Global Programs, Center for Humans and Nature
Deputy Chair, Ethics Specialist Group, IUCN Commission on Environmental Law
with
Dr. J. Ronald Engel, founder of the IUCN Ethics Working Group (1984)
Dr. George Rabb, Honorary IUCN Member and former Chair of the IUCN SSC (1989-1996)
The Honorable Kang Dong-Kyun, Mayor of Gangjeong Village
DATE: September 9, 2012
RE: EMERGENCY MOTION SUBMISSION: MOTION ON THE GANGJEONG VILLAGE
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Rules of Procedure of the World Conservation Congress, the Center for Humans and Nature as sponsor, and the 34 co-sponsors listed below, submit this emergency motion regarding the Civilian Military Complex Tour Beauty being built in and near Gangjeong Village, Seogwipo Province, Jeju Island, Republic of Korea:
World Appeal to Protect the People, Nature, Culture and Heritage of Gangjeong Village
As required, more than three of the following five criteria have been met and are explained as follows. Please note that what is listed is only a small part of what could be listed.
I. Subject is new, means that the issue which is the subject of the resolution or recommendation has arisen within ninety days before the start of the session of the World Conservation Congress;
Gangjeong Village, the party most directly affected by the naval construction, did not have access to information regarding the nature of IUCN or the process to bring their concerns to IUCN. They first learned about it from IUCN members responding to their July 11, 2012 Open Letter. They were never approached by the host country about membership, workshops, motions, etc., as was done with other NGOs, universities and government bodies.
IUCN members outside of the country were assured by the Union that everything was appropriately being carried forward, and new information emerged over the course of the last 90 days that this was not true.
The EIA was only completed after villagers filed suit, and did not involve input from the local community. It was released to the Gangjeong Villagers on July 18th, and the subsequent translations and/or disbursement to scientists and academics was around July 26th. Knowing the IUCN Congress was quickly approaching, well respected and dedicated scientists immediately flew to the country to make a proper assessment of the species at risk. The revised assessment from a team of scientists with Endangered Species International was received September 3, 2012, ENDANGERED SPECIES RELOCATION ASSESSMENT, CIVILIAN-MILITARY COMPLEX PORT DEVELOPMENT, JEJU ISLAND, SOUTH KOREA. (entire report available).
Findings from the habitat and species relocation assessments show failed relocation for the endangered K. borealis where all breeding frogs were left on site and only tadpoles were removed. The released tadpoles are thought to have a low survival rate due to the presence of potential predators.
The relocation of the C. denticulata keunbaei was incomplete, as a population still remained on site. Further, 5,300 shrimps were released downstream along Gangjeong Creek where a population of C. denticulata keunbaeis had already been established. This increased the risk of surpassing the carrying capacity of this area. Shrimps should have been released at other alternative suitable sites to increase the chance of their survival.
Also in August, a second scientific team conducted an underwater survey of Jeju soft coral habitat and completed four dives at three locations in two days, the Coral Garden, the light house vicinity, and Seo Gun Do. The lead scientist stated “As a specialist in Octocorallia (soft corals), it is my duty, and my honor, to help the local villagers defend their environment and their way of life, and their beautiful octocorals to which I am so devoted. I have been studying Octocorallia all around the world, in both the Atlantic (Florida, Puerto Rico, Belize, Mexico, Jamaica, Bermuda) and the Pacific (the Philippines, Australia, Fiji, New Caledonia,Thailand, Chuuk, Hawaii, Japan and Okinawa) for 42 years. I can state unequivocally, based on my personal observations and a review of pertinent scientific literature, that Jeju’s octocoral assemblages are unique, spectacular, and worthy of special protection. They form the largest and most spectacular temperate Octocoral forests known on Earth. Jeju’s soft coral habitat has not been reported outside of Korea. It’s existence is yet unknown to the international soft coral society.” (full report available)
The irrevocable nature of the damage has become apparent as the caissons were built in the last 90 days and cannot be removed without explosives.
The government currently gives the impression that this project has the consent of the citizens of Gangjeong. On April 26, 2007, the previous mayor held a small referendum where 87 villagers were present, and for the first time, counted a vote through clapping. However, only upon recent fact-finding was it discovered that there was a referendum on August 20, 2007: 725 villagers voted, 680 voted against, 36 voted for, and 9 votes were defective; therefore 94% of voters were in opposition of the project. This second referendum is not recognized by the government.
Dr. Imok Cha, a highly respected oncologist and registered participant of IUCN, was deported on September 4th for the first time in her life. She was invited as a panelist to the official CEL workshop on ethics. She was helping the villagers to understand the EIA and the scientific gaps of the document. No reason was given for her deportation.
Umisedo Yutaka and Matsushima Yusuke, members of Save the Dugong, a new IUCN member as of WCC4 Barcelona, were deported on September 6th. They are listed partners of Save Jeju Now.
In the past three months, numerous requests were made to the DG, President and other IUCN Secretariat leadership to create a space for the discussion of the naval base, and all requests were denied. When members modified their own workshops to give the issue a voice, and made it known during the weeks before the WCC, they were targeted and questioned by IUCN Secretariat.
The Korean Navy gave its first press conference on the naval base on September 6th, stating it as ‘eco-friendly.’ The level of green-washing taking place is something new, urgent and unforeseen. We are concerned that private and public sectors from around the world are misusing the term ‘green’, ‘green economy’, and ‘green growth’, similar to the misuse of the term ‘sustainable development’ historically (Res. 1.46 Use of the Concept of Sustainable Development, “CONCERNED THAT in practice environmental factors are not yet fully incorporated into all projects and programmes which are termed “sustainable development”).
II. Subject is urgent, means a matter in respect of which developments are about to take place soon after the World Congress and upon which a resolution or recommendation of the World Congress may reasonably be expected to have an impact;
Due to their protests, many villagers are in prison and awaiting trial.
Construction and dredging is taking place, and the pace is increasing, day and night.
Deportations are increasing, and includes nationals and internationals.
Over the past few months, arrests and police brutality have been increasing, from four raids a day, upwards to ten. 100-300 police a day march out to push the protesters aside and make arrests. In addition to the arrests, particularly of religious leaders, and the lack of transparency and indigenous participation in decision-making, a January 2012 report was made by the Asian Human Rights Commission “Case of Gangjeong: good example of worst governance.”
Unless action is taken immediately, the loss of biodiversity, the loss of this ecosystem, and the loss of this community, will be irrevocable.
The caissons are being set in place, and once they are placed, there is no way they can be removed except through explosives.
Water supply of this southern region of Jeju comes from an aquifer in the village that is being irrevocably destroyed.
The tangerine farms in Gangjeong and the soft corals are already seeing damage due to the settling dust from the construction. Entire fields of tangerines are rotting. This is directly impacting their economy today.
Registered Korean participants are being searched for Gangjeong Village materials when they enter the WCC which are then immediately taken away. In the DG’s letter, she stated that they would be able to hand materials out.
Registered participants and invited speakers from the village are afraid to enter the WCC, that they will be harassed by the alarmingly high levels of police, military and security. One registered participant had her sticker ripped from her IUCN badge after entering the conference center.
The construction has already fenced off coastline that is integral to the welfare and survival of the villagers: this winter, for the first time in 4,000 years, the villagers will not be able to gather the many seaweeds that grow on the Gureombi, a main source of sustenance.
III. Subject could not have been foreseen, means a matter which, while not itself new, has been the subject of developments within ninety days before the start of the session of the World Congress which call for action by the World Congress;
It would seem reasonable that IUCN would anticipate issues of this fundamental seriousness within the host country, and in such close vicinity to the Congress site, and prepare a vehicle by which it could be discussed and objectively assessed by the membership. It was unforeseen that IUCN did not inform the membership or provide a space for dialogue at the Congress.
Typhoon Bolaven hit the island around August 27, 2012, damaging all seven caissons and other structures, giving evidence to the scientific geographical inappropriateness of the base. Typhoons hit Jeju many times each year and are increasing in intensity due to climate change.
Samsung, the sponsor of WCC, was not promoted on the official IUCN WCC site until the WCC opened. Samsung funds the naval installation. This is the same concern for Hyundai. So, not only is IUCN not informing its participants of the issue, but they are taking financial support from one of the developers of the base. IUCN has a duty to investigate its partnerships.
The formal application of a booth was denied to the villagers, due to ‘on-site partners’ (August 28, 2012 IUCN Statement Responding to the Third Open Letter) on August 22. It was completely unknown to membership that a host country or ‘on-site partners’ could have any censorship role in the policy and programme of IUCN.
IV. arises out of deliberations of the World Congress, means a matter which has been discussed at any officially scheduled matter during the World Congress; including business and conservation sittings, technical meetings, Commission meetings, meetings of working groups or associated meetings;
The need for a motion was discussed at the IUCN CEL Commission Meeting, Days 1 and 2; the Knowledge Cafe on September 7th, A Case Study in Integrating Ethics into the Management of Water Ecosystems, “The Loss of Wild Rivers and Coastal Communities in Korea: reconciling IUCN partnerships and their vision of a just world that values and conserves nature” hosted by the Ethics Specialist Group, IUCN Commission on Environmental Law; Save Jeju Now; Gangjeong Village Association; the Water-Culture Institute; the Water Ethics Network; and the Center for Humans and Nature; and is the focus of the CEL Workshop on September 10th.
The Knowledge Café was the largest in the known history of any of the involved members, drawing numerous media and over 30 participants, all surrounding a single table. Our membership yearned for this information. They care about the issue and want a stop to the construction of the base, a stop to the destruction of the people and nature.
This motion needs to be voted upon, for the future of this village, for the future of this island, for the future of the people and species that live here, and for the future of IUCN as a leader in the international environmental forum. This is an issue of democracy, transparency, conservation, science, law and ethics. This is an issue of a small village, a unique and disappearing culture, surrounded by complex and fragile biodiversity, and all immediately and irrevocably threatened.
Thank you for your attention.
Sponsor – Center for Humans and Nature
Co-Sponsors
-Chicago Zoological Society (USA)
-International Council of Environmental Law (Germany)
-El Centro Ecuatoriano de Derecho Ambiental, CEDA (Ecuador)
-Sierra Club (USA)
-Fundacion Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (Argentina)
-Center for Sustainable Development CENESTA (Iran)
-Asociación Preserve Planet (Costa Rica)
-The Christensen Fund (USA)
-Terra Lingua (Canada)
-Ecological Society of the Philippines (Philippines)
-Citizen’s Institute Environmental Studies (Korea)
-Departamento de Ambiente, Paz y Seguridad, Universidad para la Paz (Costa Rica)
-Coastal Area Resource Development and Management Association (Bangladesh)
-Fundação Vitória Amazônica (Brazil)
-Fundación para el Desarrollo de Alternativas Comunitarias de Conservación del Trópico, ALTROPICO Foundation (Ecuador)
-Fundación Futuro Latinoamericano (Ecuador)
-EcoCiencia (Ecuador)
-Fundación Hábitat y Desarrollo de Argentina (Argentina)
-Instituto de Montaña (Peru)
-Asociación Peruana para la Conservación de la Naturaleza, APECO (Peru)
-Coordinadora de Organizaciones Indígenas de la Cuenca Amazónica, COICA (Ecuador)
-Fundación Biodiversidad (Argentina)
-Fundacao Vitoria Amazonica (Brazil)
-Fundación Urundei (Brazil)
-Dipartimento Interateneo Territorio Politecnico e Università di Torino (Italy)
-Programa Restauración de Tortugas Marinas (Costa Rica)
-Corporación Grupo Randi Randi (Ecuador)
-Living Oceans Society (Canada)
-Instituto de Derecho y Economía Ambiental (Paraguay)
-Korean Society of Restoration Ecology (Korea)
-Ramsar Network Japan (Japan)
-The Society for the Protection of Nature in Israel (Isreal)
-Chimbo Foundation (Netherlands)
-Endangered Wildlife Trust (South Africa)
On September 6th, the opening day of the 2012 WCC in Jeju, 5 anti-base activists climbed a 10 meter high, 8,800 ton caisson in Hwasoon Port, about a 40 minute car ride from Gangjeong village. Samsung is making these massive concrete caissons there and shipping them to Gangjeong, where they plan to use them to build the huge piers of the naval base.
Given that it is clear that the Jeju Naval base to be built in Gangjeong Village will be a military outpost of the United States, we cannot stand for our Gangjeong Village, Our Jeju Island to be in the middle of a conflict between an expanding China and the United States containment efforts. We know that the destruction of Gangjeong Village and Jeju, the Peace Island, will become the suffering of all our people. […]
Because of the recent typhoons, all seven caisson [brought so far to Gangjeong], the symbol of the Jeju Naval Base construction, were completely broken to pieces and left under the Gangjeong Sea. Still the Navy and [construction companies] Samsung and Daelim continue to eagerly produce new caisson in Hwasoon Port […]
Many villagers, religious figures, and peace activists have been injured, arrested, and imprisoned to stop this naval base construction (destruction) in the village.
Even though our power might be small, we will fight with all our strength against this enormous dominating power, symbolized by this caisson.
Therefore we will eventually REVOKE the Jeju naval base project, save the peace of Gangjeong and the peace of all humanity
The action began around dawn, with the 5 protestors scaling the caisson and displaying three large banners, two in Korean, on in English which said, “No! Naval Base in Jeju!” At approximately 7:30 a.m., construction workers violently assaulted the occupiers and began destroying the banners. The police began arresting the protestors by 8:30 a.m. 3 were arrested first as two of the protestors had chained themselves. Finally by 9 a.m. all were arrested and are, as of this posting, in police custody in the Seogwipo police station. Two of them are complaining of strong back pain as a result of assault by the workers. As of this time, the charges appear to be “Group Trespass of a Facility”.
The aforementioned caissons are a subject of major contention by the anti-base activists and Gangjeong villagers. In the late 90s, years before the Jeju Naval base construction was even begun, the South Korean Ministry of Construction and Traffic declared that, due to the topography and weather of the South Jeju Sea, caissons were not proper to be used for construction in this area.
Completely ignoring this statement, the Navy/Construction company plan calls for total of 144 caissons to be dropped in the total conservation area of the Gangjeong Sea of Southern Jeju. These massive caissons are also being dropped only 1km from a UNESCO World Natural Heritage Site and amidst Korean some of the worlds largest soft coral habitats. Soft coral is also a natural monument and endangered species in Korean.
When Samsung first began to bring the caisson to Gangjeong, it was discovered that they had not even done a simple and legally required inspection of the giant floating dock which is used to transport them. Samsung was later fined for this highly dangerous action.
Finally, two recent typhoons have been completely destroyed the 7 poorly made and dangerously placed thus far in the Gangjeong Sea. Their wreckage has litered the sea floor and contaminated the famously clean waters of Gangjeong. Learning nothing from this, Samsung continues to produce the caisson and will not change their plan. The Gangjeong sea is in a state of environmental emergency and if these unstable, unfit, and dangerous caissons continue to be dropped in this precious environment, the destruction could turn catastrophic.
In light of this new emergency, and the ongoing emergency of the illegal, unjust, and environmental destructive construction of the Jeju Naval Base in Gangjeong, the Gangjeong Village Association applied for a booth at the WCC 2012, to spread the word of this disaster. However, this booth was rejected by the IUCN under pressure from the South Korean Government and Samsung, a major sponsor of the WCC and primary destroyer of Gangjeong.
Please spread the word on this action and the Gangjeong Struggle. Especially, IUCN members, we appeal to you to listen to the cry of Gangjeong!
Photo by Kim Yong-Sung: The Grand March for the Peace of Gangjeong
We appeal to the people of the world who oppose warfare and are concerned with making the world a peaceful and sustainable community.
Please take part in our international solidarity action week from Sept. 2-9, 2012, during the World Conservation Congress 2012 which will be held in Jeju Island.
The 2012 World Conservation Congress, which is an environmental conference held every 4 years by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), is to take place from 6-15 September in Seogwipo city, Jeju Island. Jeju Island is located in the southern part of South Korea, adjacent to China, Taiwan, and Japan.
However, in Gangjeong village, which is only 7 km far from the congress site, construction to build a massive naval base is being enforced. The total size of the naval base is 490,000 square meters and it will not only harm the environment but also ignite military tensions despite the opposition of a great number of villagers.
Gangjeong village in Jeju is blessed with a natural environment which should be preserved for the future of humanity.
Gangjeong village is a coastal town with a sacred environment and high value preservation not only in Jeju Island, but also in the world.
The Sea of Gangjeong village is designated as a national cultural treasure (natural memorial No. 442) by the Korean Cultural Heritage Administration of Korea and is adjacent to Beom Island, a UNESCO Biosphere Reserve. Gangjeong village is God’s blessing natural heritage. The sea of Gangjeong is one of the major habitats of the Indo-Pacific bottlenose dolphins, one of the species listed by the IUCN. It is estimated that there are only 114 Indo-Pacific bottlenose dolphins in Korea.
Gangjeong village is located between the two biggest creeks in Jeju Island and has the biggest freshwater fish habitat on the island. It provides 70–80% of drinking water to southern residents in the island. As Jeju Island lacks water due to its porous basaltic land, this uncommon village is nicknamed as ‘Il-Gangjeong’ which means the best Gangjeong village. Due to this character, it has been the ‘heartland of agriculture’ from ancient times. Artifacts from prehistoric times showing the transformation of housing culture have been also discovered in Gangjeong. For such reasons, Gangjeong was appointed as a limited development district until the Jeju naval base construction plan was drafted.
Gureombi rock, located at the Jeju naval base construction site, is a broad flat rock with 1.2 km in length and 250m in width and it forms a greatly peculiar bedrock wetland where spring water comes upward. As Gureombi rock is a part of absolute preservation area by Jeju local government, it is home to the Government designated endangered species such as sesarma intermedium, small round frogs, Jeju saebaengi (native freshwater shrimp of Jeju Island), and clithon retropietus v. martens.
However, the Government is unilaterally enforcing the construction of the naval base without appropriate eval!uation and even by easing regulations expediently or ignoring them illegally. It is clear that the naval base will not only destroy the environment of the sea of Gangjeong village, but also cause the serious destruction of the environment of UNESCO Biosphere Reserve located just 2 km away from the construction site.
There is no doubt that this construction is entirely contrary to the principals of the World Conservation Congress. The efforts of the South Korean government and Jeju local government to promote Jeju island as a world environmental city, while unilaterally enforcing the construction of the naval base, is deceiving global citizens.
Suggested Actions
1. Please choose at least one day during Sept. 2-9 and organize any individual or collective actions to oppose the Jeju naval base. Please send us your endorsement to gangjeongintl@gmail.com
2.There are many events being planned in Jeju, Gangjeong village during this International Action Week. If possible, please come to the village and be part of our nonviolent struggle which has been ongoing for more than 5 years.
3. Please inform the world that the construction of the naval base in Jeju is fully contrary to the principal of 2012 World Conservation Congress. Please make calls to the World Conservation Congress member organizations and member states to express concerns about the Jeju naval base construction.
4. Please ask the South Korean government and Jeju local government to stop building the military base, revoke the naval base project, and make Jeju Island develop intact as an island of world peace.
5. It is hypocritical for Samsung, the main contractor of the naval base project, to support financially the largest environmental event in the world. Please urge Samsung C&T and Daelim, two main contractors, to stop constructing naval base in Jeju
The following people and groups endorse the action:
National
# Gangjeong Village Association
# Jeju Pan-Island Committee for Stop of Military Base and for Realization of Peace Island (26 organizations)
# Korea Environment NGO Network (36 Korean environmental NGOs)
# National Network of Korean Civil Society for Opposing to the Naval Base in Jeju Island (125 Korean civil society organizations)
Corazon Valdez Fabros, Stop the War Coalition Philippines (Contact: corafabros@gmail.com )
J.Narayana Rao, Director Global Network Against Weapons And Nuclear Power in Space,Nagpur,India (Contact: jnrao36@sify.com)
Peace Women Partners, Merci Angeles, President, Philippines (Contact:mvl.pwp@gmail.com )
Women’s Education, Development, Productivity and Research Organization, Inc. (WEDPRO), Philippines Aida Santos, Executive Director ( Contact: aida.fulleros.santos@gmail.com )
The following statement is the 3rd open letter mailed to the leadership of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature. It was originally posted here.
TO:IUCN Leadership, Participants, and Global Environmental Organizations
FROM:Emergency Action Committee to Save Jeju Island
IUCN leadership still refuses to criticize Korea’s destructive naval base, though construction work is killing rare soft corals, numerous endangered species (including from IUCN’s Red List), and destroying indigenous communities and livelihoods. This stance from IUCN defies its traditional mission, conserving nature and a “just world.”
NEW RESOLUTIONS ARE NEEDED FOR EMERGENCY VOTE OF ALL IUCN MEMBERS
********************************
ABOUT A MONTH AGO, this committee was joined by dozens of co-signers from around the world, in circulating open letters to the leadership of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), and its associated members. The statements were remarking on recent actions of IUCN that directly conflict with its important historical mandates.
While continuing to proclaim its devotion to protecting Nature, including the planet’s endangered places and species, IUCN leadership has ignored or whitewashed projects that are assaulting these wonders, and undermining human rights and sustainable livelihoods. For example, the organization inexplicably planned its giant September convention only a few minutes’ bus ride from one of the world’s great current outrages—the construction of a large new naval base near the village of Gangjeong, on Jeju Island, the “jewel” of South Korea. The naval base project, meant to become home-port for Korean and U.S. missile-carrying warships 300 miles from China, is threatening one of the planet’s last great soft coral reefs, and other coastal treasures, killing numerous endangered species (including one on IUCN’s famous Red List), and destroying centuries-old sustainable communities of local farmers and fishers. The Gangjeong villagers have been protesting the base project for years, and are being met with daily police brutality. Such activities represent all that IUCN has traditionally opposed.
Then, a few days ago (August 22), an official letter arrived from IUCN leadership informing the indigenous villagers that their application to host a small Information Booth at the convention was denied, though dozens have been granted for corporations and other groups. No explanation was offered. (More details below.)
In our earlier communiques we referred to public statements from IUCN Director-General, Julia Marton-Lefevre, supporting the Korean government’s environmental policies, including its decisions vis-à-vis the military base and the infamous Four Rivers Project (also discussed below.)
Her praise encompassed the government’s seriously flawed “Environmental Impact Assessment” (EIA) for the base project. This, despite that the EIAignored three of the most critically endangered species at Gangjeong, the Red-footed Crab,Sesarma intermedium; the Jeju Freshwater ShrimpCaridina denticulata keunbaei), endemic to Jeju Island, and the Boreal Digging Frog pictured here (an IUCN Red-List species.) It also ignored effects upon Korea’s only pod of Indo-Pacific Bottle-nosed Dolphins which swim regularly through the area. Neither did it explore crucial impacts upon 40 species of soft coral, including nine that are seriously endangered, and five that are already protected by CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora). This activity takes place only 250 meters from a UNESCO Biosphere Reserve, Tiger Island.
(In an upcoming letter we will report on a far more authoritative environmental impact statement now being conducted, secretly, by a team of well-known, non-governmental volunteer scientists from several countries—some with prominent IUCN member organizations. They have already documented a spectacular enormous coral garden, 7.4 hectares large, within a mile of where the destruction is now advancing. The only other place in the world where there may exist a soft-coral forest of this magnitude is in the Red Sea. (The divers are operating secretly because the government deported several prior researchers.)
On a related matter, the Director General has praised the government’s “Four Rivers Restoration.” Alas, however, this is not “restoration.” As the Korean environmental community has made clear, it’s a re-routing of Korea’s four great wild, winding rivers into straight-line channels, partly encased in concrete, combined with extensive dam building, and dredging, to make them more business-friendly. The effects on riparian communities are devastating. In four years the population of Korea’s migratory birds, such as white-naped cranes, has been reduced by two-thirds and in many areas, the rivers have become algae-infested cesspools. At the recent Ramsar Convention in Bucharest (July, 2012), the World Wetlands Network announced a “Grey Globe Award” to the Four Rivers project, ranking it among the five worst wetlands projects in the world. The IUCN community should publicly denounce it, too.
Throughout the run-up to the Convention, neither Director-General Marton-Lefevre, nor President Ashok Khosla, has expressed any disapproval of the above ongoing assaults on Nature. Neither have they made mention of the police beatings and arrests of the indigenous protestors from Gangjeong village who are trying, every day, to protect Nature’s treasures from being destroyed—activities that the IUCN was actually created to protect.
90% AGREEMENT
The response to our earlier e-mailers was enormous, with at least 90% of respondents supporting our positions—including many from mid-level IUCN leadership. In a brief burst of democratic openness, the IUCN’s web-page reprinted our letters, while responding with generalities about its great concern for Nature, and democratic process, and it opened the page for public comments. But after the first 20 comments appeared, all of them critical of IUCN’s position, the responses were erased off the page. On the other hand, the Korean government’s manifesto on its dubious “green” development policies continues to be displayed. So much for democracy.
IUCN also announced that it will propose that attendees pass a proclamation (“Nature+”)concerning the glories of Nature, but which still does not mention what’s going on ten minutes away, and while also denying permission for the local community to formally state their views in the Congress meetings. Up to this moment, the leadership of IUCN continues to avoid any expression of concern or even awareness of the impacts on Nature and community, just down the street, though such concerns are central to the organization’s mandate.
Why is IUCN leadership remaining so silent?For the leadership, it may be more of a financial and political matter than one of conservation or social justice, which is what IUCN was supposed to be about. There is also an underlying reality:A large percentage of the cost of this WCC convention in Jeju is being covered by the very people building the military base. Those would be the Korean government, and several giant global corporations, notably Samsung.
Having accepted the funding, it is difficult to criticize the funders.
IUCN’s top leadership has apparently determined its best course now is to avert its gaze while the government kills the shrimps and the frogs, destroys the corals, and jails the protesting local farmers. Meanwhile, IUCN can freely proceed with its great meeting next door to save Nature.
But the organization has gone still further. IUCN has granted the Korean government (the “Korean Organizing Committee of the 2012 WCC,” the chair of which, is Lee Hongkoo, the former Prime Minister of Korea, a supporter of the base) approval-power over any South Korean organizations wanting to present alternative views. These include whether to grant permission to speak on the issues at the meeting, even when they are invited to do so by bona-fide IUCN member organizations, or merely to host an information table at the event. (See #2 below.) IUCN has also agreed to partner with its Korean financial sponsor in constructing and presenting the formal program of the Convention. So now, the government, eager to advertise its green initiatives, will be represented on every one of the five “prime-time” plenary panels of the convention, either by government or corporate officials. It is the only country in the world to be so privileged. None of those panels will focus on the Gangjeong military base construction, or the Four Rivers fiasco.
Finally, the questions become these: Whose IUCN is this? Does the complicity of IUCN leadership truly represent IUCN membership? Can anything useful still be achieved at the WCC in Jeju? On the latter point, we actually think YES, there still is. We call upon the IUCN participants to use the occasion to take stands on the following:
FOUR STEPS TO CHALLENGE MILITARY BASE DESTRUCTION & TO RE-ESTABLISH IUCN’S HISTORIC MISSION TO PROTECT NATURE AND HUMAN RIGHTS
#1. Assembly Resolutions: Shut the Base; Make a New EIA; Stop the Four Rivers Project.
Since our prior letters, our committee has become aware of the great work of several independent groups of environmental attorneys, representing IUCN-member organizations. They are working toward a series of Draft Resolutions to be presented at the WCC Assemblies, including all members. Among them are these:
Shut the Base. The first Resolution will demand that Korea end its military base construction, and that all ravaged lands be restored to their former condition. The Resolution will speak in behalf of the endangered species, the rare soft corals, the sacred sites, and the local villagers who are putting their lives on the line to protect these treasures.
The once-celebrated southern Jeju coastline is now being covered in concrete, thanks to the Korean government, Samsung corporation, and the silence of IUCN.
It will also describe the many IUCN rules and prior decisions that have been violated. These include, for example, the important principles of the Earth Charter passed by the 2004 Congress, as well as the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, the Convention on Biological Diversity, the World Heritage Convention, the UN Declaration on Human Rights, the International Covenant on Economic and Social Rights, among many others.
New Environmental Impact Assessment. A second Resolution may demand preparation and acceptance of a new Environmental Impact Assessment of the naval base construction near Gangjeong—free of government control and censorship—that will include a truly accurate assessment of the dredging and other impacts on the soft coral reefs, and the killing of rare species that are all absent from the government’s document. (As indicated above, a new independent EIA is already being prepared by several outraged IUCN scientists.)
End The Four Rivers Project. A third Resolution will demand that Korea immediately discontinue its notorious Four Rivers Restoration project, and begin to actually restore the great rivers to their prior condition.
There is one potential complication. Unsurprisingly, the attorneys were told by some IUCN management not to bother with these motions. They will be “too late,” past deadline, they were told. And yet, the historical record of IUCN offers many examples of last minute submissions. They have always been permitted if they raise new, urgent, unforeseen issues, and if at least ten IUCN members co-sponsor the request. There are already more than ten willing IUCN co-sponsors. And they certainly qualify as urgent new matters for IUCN. If we don’t stop this destruction now, by the time IUCN meets again in four years, the corals, the Boreal Digging Frogs and other species, and many local people will be dead. We must not let that happen.
#2. Let the Gangjeong People Speak.
Information Booth Crisis. As briefly mentioned above, the Gangjeong villagers, working to save habitats, biodiversity, and the Red-List species from the military’s destruction, applied a few months ago through official IUCN channels for permission to set up one “information booth” among the dozens of others that have been okayed within the convention center throughout the meeting. That would seem a benign enough request, but a runaround ensued. Instead of routinely okaying the application, the IUCN passed it to the Korean government (the KOC, mentioned above) which is heavily invested in silencing any and all opposition to the base or the Four Rivers project. Korean newspapers have also been silenced on these matters. Repeated efforts over recent weeks to confirm permission for the information table were ignored. Finally, a few days ago, they received an official letter from the Director of IUCN’s Constituency Support Group, Enrique Lahmann. He said this: “Unfortunately, we are not able to accommodate your request for an exhibition booth at the WCC.” That’s it. No reason was given. And no explanation of how this fullfills official IUCN proclamations of democracy and inclusiveness.
No Protest Allowed Within Two Kilometers. Meanwhile, the Korean government announced that it would not permit any demonstrations or even picketing within two kilometers of the Convention. So, no information table inside. No demonstrations outside. Where are we again? Isn’t South Korea supposed to be a democracy?
During the upcoming Assemblies, IUCN leaders must at last denounce the government for these appalling moves, and permit the villagers, who are actually doing IUCN’s work, to not only have their information table inside the convention, but if they so choose, to go ahead and demonstrate freely outside, just as if this were a democratic society.
Addressing the Full Assembly. All of the above is not enough. The Gangjeong community should be permitted —-no, invited by IUCN leadership—to address the opening and/or closing plenary of the IUCN convention, to provide the full story of this local disaster and what they are going through. If the government resists, the IUCN leadership should insist. We all need to hear from the indigenous local farmers and fisher-people, and the custodians of the sacred sites, about what they have seen and experienced. Everyone needs to hear this. After all, we are meeting on their indigenous soil, on their island, on the coast that has nurtured them for thousands of years. So, our own group inquired as to the possibility of the villagers speaking at the assembly, but we were told by IUCN officials, as above, that all South Korean presenters have to be approved by the government.
Here’s some good news. Several IUCN member groups have already (quietly) invited local leaders to participate in some of the groups’ own scheduled workshop panel time to tell the Gangjeong story. (In our next letter, we will brief you on who is speaking and at what time. By delaying this announcement, we hope to avoid government crackdowns against the groups.)
#3. Go Visit the Destruction Sites, and the Sacred Sites.
Members of our committee, and our Korean colleagues, will be arranging tours of Gangjeong village, the sacred sites that are threatened, and the front-lines of the ongoing confrontation between the villagers and the police at the construction site. It is horrifying and inspiring. (If you want to join those outings, please respond gangjeongintl@gmail.com.) It’s very easy to get there—ten minutes by local bus.
#4 Institutional Self-Examination.
Finally, we suggest that all IUCN members take this moment to assess what is happening in Jeju, and to initiate a process of institutional self-examination, questioning and re-organization. None of us can afford to lose the moral and ethical leadership of one of the world’s greatest organizations. We need to do whatever is necessary to assure that IUCN will revive its historical mandate to place Nature first, and to protect social justice.
Thank you for your attention.
Please let us know if you want to see the proposed resolutions; we will forward you the final texts when they are complete. We can also forward you the new independent Environmental Impact Assessment, when it is completed. And you can sign up for a visit and tour of Gangjeong Village and the military construction site. (OUR EMAIL ADDRESS IS BELOW.)
EMERGENCY ACTION TO SAVE JEJU ISLAND ORGANIZING COMMITTEE:
IUCN leadership refuses to criticize Korea’s destructive naval base that is killing numerous endangered species, and destroying indigenous communities. This stance from IUCN defies its traditional mission, conserving nature and a “just world.”
The International Union for Conservation of Nature’s (IUCN) World Conservation Congress is the world’s largest environmental event. Held every four years, the 2012 World Conservation Congress (WCC) will be held from September 6-15 on Jeju Island, the “jewel” of South Korea. Over 7,000 leaders from government, the public sector, non-governmental organizations, business, UN agencies and social organizations will meet at this event.
Meeting just a few miles from Gangjeong village the IUCN has over and over again resisted requests from those living in the 450-year old fishing and farming community to help them protect their sacred nature and coastline from Navy base construction. A five-year non-violent campaign rages in the village and more than 500 people have been arrested for attempting to block the destruction of their way of life.
While continuing to proclaim its devotion to protecting Nature through democratic process, IUCN leadership has ignored or whitewashed projects that are assaulting these wonders, and undermining human rights and sustainable livelihoods.
The naval base project, meant to become homeport for Korean and U.S. “missile defense” warships 300 miles from China, is threatening one of the planet’s last great soft coral reefs, and other coastal treasures, killing numerous endangered species (including one on IUCN’s famous Red List), and destroying centuries-old sustainable communities.
The Gangjeong villagers are being met with daily police brutality. Such activities represent all that IUCN has traditionally opposed. Samsung corporation construction division is building the Navy base and has made significant financial contributions toward the WCC.
On August 22, an official letter arrived from IUCN leadership informing the Gangjeong villagers that their request to host a small Information Booth at the convention was denied. No explanation was offered.
“The Korean government announced that it would not permit any demonstrations or even picketing within two kilometers of the Convention. So, no speaker from the village or information table inside. No demonstrations outside. We are disappointed because we thought the IUCN stood for democratic participation,” commented Sung-Hee Choi, a Gangjeong resident and member of the International Organizing Committee.
Gangjeong villagers continue to press for a chance to address the IUCN and for a public display booth at the event. Efforts have been made to contact most of the thousands of IUCN delegates coming to the event and several have volunteered to introduce resolutions opposing the Navy base. Villagers intend to invite IUCN members to visit Gangjeong and see the environmental devastation for themselves.
OPEN LETTER #1: REQUESTING POSTPONEMENT OF IUCN CONVENTION ON JEJU ISLAND, UNLESS MILITARY DESTRUCTION IS ENDED
The following statement with 131 signatories, is the 1st of 3 open letters mailed to the leadership of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature. It was originally posted here.
OPEN MEMO TO: All Leadership, the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN)
THE IUCN 2012 WORLD CONSERVATION CONGRESS (WCC), scheduled for September 6-15 at Jungmun Resort on Jeju Island, was apparently planned several years ago by IUCN leadership without full awareness of current circumstances on Jeju—circumstances that display values and behaviors exactly opposite to the historic goals of IUCN.
The IUCN describes the Congress as “the world’s largest and most important conservation event,” aiming “to improve how we manage our natural environment for human, social and economic development.” Nothing could be more diametrically opposed to sustaining those values than the environmental and social assaultsnow underway only minutes away, along the nearby coastline, and in the traumatized Gangjeong Village. That is where construction has begun on a huge new military base, rapidly devastating a region of rare beauty, vibrant soft-coral reefs, pure freshwater springs, numerous endangered species, and traditional sustainable cultures and villages, and where police actions are brutalizing local populations who attempt to oppose the development.
The undersigned believe it would be massively ironic, contradictory, and scandalous, for the IUCN to ignore the attacks on living nature, and on traditional sustainable culture, that are daily underway a few miles from the scheduled IUCN meeting. Holding a conference in the face of such nearby, ongoing devastation, would destroy the credibility of IUCN, and be an eternal embarrassment for all participants at the meeting.
We therefore insist that the leadership of IUCN demand that the government of South Korea immediately stop this appalling development, remove its military, and free the local population trying to recover the environment and traditional culture that is being actively destroyed. In lieu of that, IUCN should immediately cancel its meeting in Jeju, and reschedule in a timely manner, in another place with values that are aligned with the organization’s mission. Details follow.
Crimes Against Nature:
Five years ago, the South Korean government announced that it would begin blasting Gangjeong’s rare lava-rock coastline, the only rocky wetland on Jeju Island, to make way for a new naval base intended to berth South Korean and U.S. Aegis missile-carrying warships, a thinly veiled threat against China. The base project is located 1.7 km away from sacred Beom Islet (Tiger Isle), which is a UNESCO biosphere preserve.
Coastal blasting began in earnest in March 2012, despite continuous passionate protests from local Gangjeong residents. It has already transformed an extraordinary coastline into an ecological disaster area. Uniquely beautiful soft-coral reefs, with very high levels of native biodiversity, extend widely across the area, directly in front of the base project. They are now being aggressively destroyed. Environmentalist and actor Robert Redford recently reported on the 57 four-story-tall caissons poised to drop on miles of soft coral reefs.
The coastline features a single massive Andesite bed rock, with year-round fresh water streams and springs. Bubbling through the lava for millennia, these precious waters have now been contaminated by the dynamiting of the coastline. The blasting and construction are also shattering the rare ecosystem in places where fresh spring water mixes with sea water. The brackish water’s life-giving qualities are recognized by villagers, who call it “grandmother water.”
These places provide unique habitat for many endangered species, including the narrow-mouth toad (Kaloula borealis), which is, ironically, on the IUCN’s critical Red List! Other endangered species threatened by the destruction include the red-foot crab (Sesarma intermedium); the Jeju fresh watershrimp (Caridina denticulate keunbaei); and mollusks such as the Gisoogal godong (Clithon retropictus).
Another endangered species doomed by the development, are Jeju’s last 100 Indo-Pacific bottle-nosed dolphins (Tursiops aduncus) which are still visible in island coastal waters.
Crimes Against Humanity
Clearly, this base construction is not only a crime against nature, but a crime against humanity. In a single blow, the base will destroy not just ecosystems and endangered species, but also resilient livelihoods within a thriving traditional village. The reef, the farms and the spring water have provided for the local village for centuries. And yet, the government has razed many acres of tangerine farms, and removed people from their land and their reefs in order to make room for a military base.
The Los Angeles Times has reported: “The new base will subsume the picturesque harbor, and its security perimeter will shut out fishermen and women who for generations have fished for abalone, sea cucumber and brown seaweed.”
One “haenyo” (traditional woman sea diver) says that pollution from the naval base has already turned the clean seawater to gray, threatening the haenyos’ livelihoods. “The Naval base will destroy the natural resources. I see cranes and large machinery at the base. I can’t believe it.”
The villagers were recently notified that the government will be seizing more land to build housing for 600 military personnel who, with their families, will outnumber the 1,930 villagers. New businesses will open to service the newcomers: Big box stores will replace village gardens; parking lots will replace farms; bars and prostitution will replace Jeju’s women divers. Gangjeong, as it has miraculously existed for centuries, will be wiped off the face of the Earth.
According to a Jeju newspaper, the base controversy has caused increased suicide rates in Gangjeong. Last year, one villager drank pesticide in a failed attempt to kill himself. He said he couldn’t live with all the destruction.
Finally, this development is also a crime againstdemocracy. Ninety-four percent of villagers voted against base construction in a recent referendum, but local wishes are ignored by the Korean government. The mayor of Gangjeong and fellow villagers have hosted numerous press conferences in Jeju City, citing continuing environmental violations by the construction crews. The Navy is never punished. Instead, the government sends hundreds of riot police to arrest protestors every day for holding prayer vigils at the gates to the construction site. They are charged with “obstruction of government activities.” The mayor himself was jailed for three months.
Our Demand
The undersigned strongly assert that it would be highly contradictory for the IUCN to ignore such startling social and environmental realities as described above, while it claims to convene global environmental leaders to protect and restore natural systems. If the 2012 World Conservation Conference proceeds as currently planned, it would permanently damage the credibility of IUCN, and be a major embarrassment for all participants. This situation must be faced, and stopped. To participate as if everything is fine will cast a black mark across the conference and all its attendees.
IUCNleadership must immediately demand that the Republic of Korea cease, at once, these unconscionable crimes against the Earth, humanity and democracy. If the government refuses, IUCN should postpone the conference and reschedule at another time and place consistent with IUCN’s urgent mission and stated values. This would be in keeping with IUCN statements on the prime necessity to act on behalf of survival of the Earth and culture.
Foundation for Deep Ecology; Int’l. Forum on Globalization
Koohan Paik
Kauai Alliance for Peace and Social Justice
SIGNERS (AS OF JULY 10):
Maude Barlow
Food and Water Watch, Council of Canadians (Canada)
John Cavanagh
Institute for Policy Studies (U.S.)
Vandana Shiva, Ph.D.
Navdanya Research Organization for Science, Technology and
Ecology (India)
Douglas Tompkins
Conservation Land Trust, Conservacion Patagonica (Chile)
Anuradha Mittal
Oakland Institute (U.S.)
Meena Raman
Third World Network (Malaysia)
Walden Bello
Member, House of Representatives (Philippines)
Tewolde Berhan Gebre Egziabher
Environmental Protection Authority (Ethiopia)
Lagi Toribau
Greenpeace-East Asia
Mario Damato, Ph.D.
Greenpeace-East Asia
Debbie Barker
Center for Food Safety (U.S.)
Pierre Fidenci
Endangered Species International (U.S.)
Victoria Tauli-Corpuz
Tebtebba Indigenous Peoples’ Int’l. Centre for
Policy Research and Education (Philippines)
John Knox
Earth Island Institute (U.S.)
David Phillips
Int’l Marine Mammal Project, Earth Island Institute (U.S.)
Mary Jo Rice
Int’l Marine Mammal Project, Earth Island Institute (U.S.)
Bill Twist
Pachamama Alliance (U.S.)
Jon Osorio, Ph.D.
Chair, Hawaiian Studies, Univ. of Hawaii (U.S.)
Sue Edwards
Institute for Sustainable Development (Ethiopia)
Gloria Steinem
Author, Women’s Media Center (U.S.)
Medea Benjamin
Code Pink, Global Exchange (U.S.)
Randy Hayes
Foundation Earth (U.S.)
Noam Chomsky
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (U.S.)
Galina Angarova
Pacific Environment (Russia)
Bruce Gagnon
Global Network Against
Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space (Int’l)
Andrew Kimbrell
Center for Food Safety (U.S.)
Jack Santa Barbara
Sustainable Scale Project (New Zealand)
Renie Wong
Hawaii Peace and Justice (Hawaii)
Kyle Kajihiro
Hawaiʻi Peace and Justice/DMZ-Hawaiʻi (Hawaii)
Terri Keko’olani
Hawai’i Peace and Justice/DMZ-Hawai’i (Hawaii)
Wayne Tanaka
Marine Law Fellow, Dept. of Land & Natural Resources (U.S.)
(signing independently)
Tony Clarke
Polaris Institute (Canada)
Sara Larrain
Sustainable Chile Project (Chile)
John Feffer
Foreign Policy in Focus (U.S.)
Victor Menotti
International Forum on Globalization (U.S.)
Arnie Saiki
Moana Nui Action Alliance (U.S.)
Nikhil Aziz
Grassroots International (U.S.)
Lisa Linda Natividad
Guahan Coalition for Peace and Justice (Guam)
Rebecca Tarbotton
Rainforest Action Network (U.S.)
Kavita Ramdas
Visiting Scholar, Stanford U., Global Fund for Women (India)
Raj Patel
Institute for Food and Development Policy/Food First (U.S.)
Alexis Dudden
Author, Professor of History, Connecticut University (U.S.)
Timothy Mason
Pastor, Calvary by the Sea, Honolulu (U.S.)
Katherine Muzik, Ph.D.
Marine Biologist, Kulu Wai, Kauai (U.S.)
Claire Hope Cummings
Author, Environmental attorney (U.S.)
Ann Wright
U.S. Army Colonel, Ret., Former U.S. Diplomat (U.S.)
Buffy Sainte-Marie, Ph.D.
Educator, Singer-Songwriter (U.S.)
Lenny Siegel
Center for Public Environmental Oversight (U.S.)
Yong Soon Min
Professor, University of California, Irvine (U.S.)
Eugeni Capella Roca
Grup d’Estudi I Protecció d’Ecosostemes de Catalunya (Spain)
Jonathan P. Terdiman, M.D.
University of California, San Francisco (U.S.)
Evelyn Arce
International Funders for Indigenous Peoples (U.S.)
Brihananna Morgan
The Borneo Project (Borneo)
Frank Magnota, Ph.D.
Physicist (U.S.)
Delia Menozzi, M.D.
Physician (Italy)
Aaron Berez, M.D.
Physician (U.S.)
Begoña Caparros
Foundation in Movement: Art for Social Change (Uganda)
Antonio Sanz
Photographer (Spain)
Cindy Wiesner
Grassroots Global Justice (U.S.)
Gregory Elich
Author, “Strange Liberators” (U.S.)
Joseph Gerson, Ph.D.
American Friends Service Committee (U.S.)
Piljoo Kim, Ph.D.
Agglobe Services International (U.S.)
Peter Rasmussen
He-Shan World Fund (U.S.)
Wei Zhang
He-Shan World Fund (U.S.)
Harold Sunoo
Sunoo Korea Peace Foundation (U.S.)
Soo Sun Choe
National Campaign to End the Korean War (U.S.)
Angie Zelter
Trident Ploughshares, (UK)
Ramsay Liem
Visiting Scholar, Center for Human Rights, Boston College (U.S.)
Kerry Kriger, PhD
Save The Frogs (U.S.)
Marianne Eguey
Jade Associates, (France)
Claire Greensfelder
INOCHI-Plutonium Free Future (U.S.-Japan)
Laura Frost, Ph.D.
The New School (U.S.)
Chris Bregler, Ph.D.
New York University (U.S.)
David Vine
Assistant Professor, American University (U.S.)
Simone Chun
Assistant Prof., Gov’t Department, Suffolk U., Boston (U.S.)
Matt Rothschild
Editor, The Progressive magazine (U.S.)
Henry Em
Professor, East Asian Studies, NYU (U.S.)
Eric Holt-Gimenez
Institute for Food and Development Policy (U.S.)
Maivan Clech Lam
Professor Emerita of Int’l Law, CUNY (U.S.)
Mari Matsuda
Professor of Law, Richardson Law School, Univ. of Hawaii (U.S.)
Beth Burrows
The Edmonds Institute (U.S.)
Aileen Mioko Smith
Green Action (Japan)
Susan George, Ph.D.
Transnational Institute (The Netherlands)
Marianne Manilov
The Engage Network (U.S.)
SOUTH KOREAN SIGNERS
Kangho Song, Ph.D.
Leader, Save Our Sea Team, Gangjeong village
(Presently in prison for civil disobedience)
Youngdeok Oh
Korea Federation for Environmental Movement of Jeju
Ho Myong
Eco Horizon Institute
Jingu Yeo
Korean Environment Education Network
Myungrae Cho
Citizens’ Movement for Environmental Justice
Kyeongjo Park
Green Korea United
Yoonmo Yang
Film critic
(Imprisoned for civil disobedience for four months in 2011)
Stephen Wunrow, Martha Vickery
Publisher/editor of Korean Quarterly
Seonghwan Min
Korean Ecoclub
Youngsun Ji
Korea Foundation for Environmental Movements
(Friends of the Earth, Korea)
Youngsuk Pak
Korean Women’s Environmental Networks
Raegun Park
Human Rights Foundation, Saram
Mihyuk Kwon
Korean Women’s Association United
Sunghee Choi
Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space
(Imprisoned for civil disobedience for two months in 2011)
Giryong Hong
Jeju Peace Human Rights Center
Chuyoung Chang
Minbyun-Lawyers for a Democratic Society
Eunkyung Oh
Jeju Women’s Assocation
Gwisook Gwon
Jeju National University
Hyekyoung An
Director, Jeju Women’s Film Festival
Jeonghae Park, Ph.D.
The Academy of Korean Studies
Gilchun Koh
Jeju artist
Misun Kang, Ph.D.
Artist
Jungjin Lee
Artist
Hyungtae Kim
Catholic Human Rights Committee
Hunjung Cho
Chun Tae-Il Foundation
Giyoung Hyun
Jeju People on Mainland who Love Gangjeong
Hongsik Kim
Jeju People on Mainland who Love Gangjeong
Moonheum Yang
Jeju People on Mainland who Love Gangjeong
Sangsoo Heo
Jeju People on Mainland who Love Gangjeong
Chansik Park
Jeju People on Mainland who Love Gangjeong
Youngjin Kim
Korea Democratic Street Venders Confederation (KDSC)
Yoonjae Cha
Masan YMCA
Boowon Nam
National Council of YMCAs of Korea
Geunyeom Chang
Peace Ground
Wooksik Cheong
Peace Network
Hyunbach Chung
People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy
Regina Pyon
Korean House for International Solidarity
Hyangyoon Mee
The Korean Council for the Women Drafted
for Military Sexual Slavery by Japan
Rev. Haehak Lee
The National Council of Churches in Korea
Committee of Justice and Peace
Hyesook Yeo
Women Making Peace
Youngjun Choi
Workers’ Solidarity All Together
Yeook Yang
World Without War
Jungmin Choi
World Without War
————————————————————————————————–
OPEN LETTER #2: LEADING SOUTH KOREAN ACTIVIST GROUPS WRITE AN OPEN LETTER TO IUCN LEADERSHIP
The following statement is the 2nd of 3 open letters mailed to the leadership of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature. It was originally posted here.
Does IUCN Director General Accept Korea’s Environmental Destruction?
Below you will find a disturbing history, prepared by 62 leading activist organizations in South Korea, who have, for many years, been trying to gain attention for environmental devastation taking place in their country.
For example, on the idyllic Korean island of Jeju, construction has begun on a huge new navy base, that is rapidly devastating a region of rare beauty, vibrant soft-coral reefs, pure freshwater springs, numerous endangered species such as Jeju’s last 100 dolphins, and traditional sustainable cultures, and where police actions are brutalizing local populations who attempt to oppose the development.
The letter below explains how the government is also pushing nuclear power plants on unwilling communities, as well as a horrific boondoggle known as the Four Major Rivers Restoration Project. Four Rivers has nothing to do with “restoration,” but, rather, is a sweetheart deal for the nation’s largest construction conglomerates to “straighten” Korea’s major rivers and its most loved riparian habitats into concrete canals.
In an astounding display of irony, the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) will convene its quadrennial convention this September only a few kilometers away from where biodiverse habitats are being blasted to make way for a military base.
As reported in the letter below, the IUCN’s Director General, Julia Marton-Lefevre, has unwisely turned a blind eye to the government’s actions and its distorted descriptions, and has even seemed, in some statements, to condone them. The IUCN has thereby made itself effectively complicit in the continuation of the ecological destruction.
The question remains as to whether IUCN will make firm efforts to speak out and to challenge the Korean government on these dire matters, starting now.
Please read the letter below, and then email the IUCN, demanding that it call on the South Korean government to put an immediate halt to the construction of the Jeju Island navy base, a halt to the construction of the Four Major Rivers Restoration Project, and a halt to Korea’s development of nuclear power.
STATEMENT TO THE IUCN AND THE WORLD CONSERVATION CONGRESS
July 10, 2012
We, civic environmental groups in South Korea, denounce the IUCN and the World Conservation Congress that have overlooked and misrepresented environmental and social conflicts in South Korea
1. In September 2012, the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) will organize the World Conservation Congress (WCC) at ICC JEJU in Jeju Island, which is expected to be attended by more than 10,000 people from over 1,100 organizations in 180 countries.
We, civic environmental groups in South Korea, have a high regard for the international cooperation projects executed by the IUCN, which endeavor to help develop and implement policies that contribute to protecting the environment. We also recognize that IUCN is globally influential; the organization carries significant weight over the registration of UNESCO World Heritage Sites, sets criteria regarding internationally endangered species and develops conservation plans.
We also respect the milestones achieved by the IUCN, including the Ramsar Convention in 1971; the World Conservation Strategy in 1978, which proposed the concept of “sustainable development”; the Convention on Biological Diversity in 1992, and the Resolution on Biodiversity, passed at the 1996 World Conservation Congress in Montreal. In addition, we recognize that it was the IUCN which enabled numerous technological advancements which are currently in use in the field to protect biological ecosystems, such as the Technical Guidelines on the Management of Ex-situ populations for Conservation.
2. Meanwhile, the Lee Myung-Bak administration has destroyed four major rivers, continues to blindly pursue nuclear power, and continues to forcefully construct a naval base at Gangjeong village on Jeju Island, despite fierce opposition, both locally and nationally.
Against this backdrop, civic environmental groups and activists in South Korea continue to denounce the administration and are taking action against its destructive projects. We call for the South Korean government to halt its construction work at the four rivers and allow nature to reclaim it. We also oppose the Lee administration’s policy of promoting nuclear power under the guise of Green Growth and exporting it to the Third World. Furthermore, we are vehemently against the government’s execution of a plan to build a naval base on Jeju Island, which is destroying biodiversity and brutally violating human rights in the name of national security.
Given the above, civic environmental groups in South Korea state the following to the IUCN, the organizer of the World Conservation Congress (WCC) in 2012, and its Organizing Committee:
3. The World Conservation Congress will be held this year in South Korea, yet the Congress gravely neglects or misrepresents environmental and social conflicts in the host country. Because the Congress is financed by the Lee Myung-Bak administration and sponsored by industrial conglomerates, there is growing public concern that the WCC is promoting policies of the Lee administration without examining whether they are truly designed to preserve the environment.
This year – 2012 – is the fifth, and last, year of President Lee’s tenure, in which his administration is taking advantage of the WCC to justify his poor environmental, peace, and labor policies. The South Korean government is using the convention to advocate for its questionable “Low Carbon Green Growth” campaign, its appalling Four Major Rivers Restoration Project, as well as its policy of prioritizing nuclear power and favoring corporate construction conglomerates.
We are concerned that the IUCN Secretariat is not addressing any of the current environmental issues in South Korea among the themes for the upcoming WCC. Rather, Director General Julia Marton-Lefevre of IUCN faithfully endorses the Korean government and its dubious policies.
The Director General said “Korea’s green growth policies and Four Major Rivers Restoration Project are the results of the efforts to ensure nature conservation and sustainable development” during a meeting with President Lee on June 4. In an interview with a Korean reporter, she described the rivers project as “reasonable.”
4. We civic environmental groups of South Korea raise this question: Are members of the IUCN and its Director General aware of the grave implications of the Four Major Rivers Restoration Project?
Under the Lee administration, South Korean society has endured tremendous social tensions and environmental conflicts. The government has prioritized development at the expense of wreaking havoc on the environment and the health of its citizens.
For example, in 2008, the 10th Meeting of the Conference of the Contracting Parties to the Convention on Wetlands was held in Korea. At that meeting, President Lee publicly declared to withdraw a plan to build a “Grand Canal” in Korea, only to re-allocate its budget to execute the Four Major Rivers Restoration Project, which has devastated the nation’s four crucial rivers. Sixteen dams were built at the rivers, destroying habitats for endangered species, critical biological diversity, and nearby wetlands. The rivers project violated several national laws, such as the National Budget Law, the River Law and the Environmental Impact Assessment Law. Construction contracts for the rivers project are reported to total around $900 million.
Before its Director General asserted that the Four Rivers project was “reasonable,” the IUCN should have conducted an on-the-ground assessment of the project, which would have shown how it is, in fact, undermining the organization’s hard work of preserving biological diversity. In December 2002, the Technical Guidelines on the Management of Ex-situ populations for Conservation were approved at the 14th Meeting of the Programme Committee of Council, in Gland, Switzerland. Nonetheless, the South Korean government’s Four Major Rivers Restoration Project has been committing gross violations of IUCN guidelines, by decimating the habitats of several endangered species, including the Danyang aster(Aster altaicus var. uchiyamae). Does the IUCN, the international environmental steward, recognize that the rivers project has utterly destroyed a haven for migratory birds’ – the Haepyeong wetland located at Gumi City, Kyeongsangbuk-do province in a flagrant breach of the Ramsar Convention? Is the IUCN aware that organic farmers in Paldang, Dumulmeori, continue to defend their farmlands against forced evictions by the Lee Administration?
5. We respectfully ask for the position of IUCN on these critical matters. Is the IUCN aware that 3,000 university professors and five leading religious groups in South Korea oppose this project? The environmental organizations in South Korea are united in opposition to this project, demanding punishment of those responsible, the removal of the dam, and the restoration of the rivers. We respectfully ask for your official position on this dire situation.
We, the civil environmental organizations of the South Korea, challenge the IUCN Director General’s position on the Four Major Rivers Restoration Project and therefore request the IUCN to clarify its position.
6. In addition, we express deep concern with the IUCN’s support of the construction of a naval base in Gangjeong village, Jeju Island. Last April, based on false information provided by the South Korean government, the IUCN issued an official position stating that “construction of the naval base in Gangjeong is valid according to legitimate processes.” It is questionable whether the IUCN put any effort into verifying the credibility of the data provided by the South Korean government.
The IUCN’s statement on the Gangjeong naval base contradicts its earlier resolutions regarding the negative impacts of military bases on the environment. At the General Assembly in 2008, the IUCN adopted “the Recommendation for protection of dugongs in Henoko, Okinawa, Japan” and at the General Assembly in Buenos Aires in 1994, passed a resolution addressing the relationship of “military base to conservation area.” The IUCN’s objective to protect global ecosystems cannot coexist with the goals of increasing militarization at the regional or global scale. We oppose the IUCN’s position regarding the naval base project in Gangjeong village, on Jeju Island.
7. The civil environmental organizations of South Korea, which seek peaceful coexistence on the Korean peninsula and with all our Northeast Asia neighbors, urge IUCN to express its clear position. Specifically regarding the naval base project in Gangjeong, we would like you to clarify whether the IUCN is aware of the serious violations of environmental laws, which have led to the destruction of species which are assigned as “endangered” by the Korean government. These endangered species include the red-footed crab (Sesarma intermedium) andClithon retropietus V. Martens. We ask you to clarify how the IUCN arrived at its conclusion that the naval base construction “is valid according to legitimate processes.”
Just to clarify, the naval base is being built at a UNESCO Biosphere Conservation Area (designated in 2002), and was designated a Cultural Protection Zone by the South Korean government in 2000 and 2004. In 2002 the government’s Ministry of Land designated it a Marine Ecosystem Conservation Area; in 2006, the government of Jeju Island designated it a Marine Provincial Park; in 2006, the Ministry of Environment designated it an “Ecological Excellent Village”; in 2007, the Jeju Island government designated it an Absolute Retention Coastal Area; and in 2008, the Ministry of Environment designated it a Natural Park. We ask you to please clarify how the IUCN would consider a project as “legitimate,” when the government mobilizes both public and private police forces against residents who have committed no crime other than to object to the project’s desecration of this precious conservation area.
Gangjeong village in Jeju is an area that must be conserved in accordance with the values of the IUCN. That would mean that the military base construction must be blocked. The IUCN must actively seek to halt the naval base construction at Gangjeong and to restore and preserve the area’s natural ecosystems through a resolution at the WCC General Assembly.
8. We, in the spirit of peace on our Korean peninsula, are besieged by the South Korean government’s arbitrary administration of law in regard to the environment, and its dictatorial push for national projects for whom only the nation’s largest corporations benefit. Since President Lee took office, his administration has expressly weakened laws which had protected South Korea’s environment.
South Korea environmentalists are gravely concerned that the government will take advantage of the WCC General Assembly proceeding this September in Jeju to advance its illegitimate national projects. We therefore demand a clear explanation of the IUCN’s position regarding the Four Rivers Restoration Project and the Gangjeong Naval Base project. We formally request the IUCN and the 2012 WCC Organizing Committee’s clear position and response, which will be a central factor to the position taken by the Korean civil environmental organizations at the WCC General Assembly.
9. In keeping with the IUCN’s prodigious achievements toward preserving the biodiversity of the planet, we expect the IUCN and the WCC Organizing Committee to show significant efforts to resolve environmental disputes and related social conflicts in the Republic of Korea, the host nation of the WCC.
As funicular cable cars on the sacred mountains of Jiri-san and Seorak-san threaten Asiatic Black Bears; as sustainable farmers from Gangwon province struggle with the seizure of their land to build a golf course; as tidal power plants at Incheon Bay and Garolim Bay threaten the livelihoods of local fishermen; as residents battle nuclear power plants in Gori, Youngduk and Samcheok; as the farmers and fisherpeople of Jeju Island cope with the destruction of their reef and farmland in order to build a navy base; as country folk struggle to exist after their villages were subsumed by water to construct dams on Mt. Jiri and Youngju; as laborers strike against brutal working conditions at SSangyoung Motors– As these manifold violations take place, we shall, with our partners in the international community, take actions to expose the daily brutality levied upon the environment and the people of South Korea, and to correct the wrong doings of the Lee Myung-Bak regime.
We wish for a peaceful resolution to these many environmental and social conflicts, and request that the IUCN and the WCC Organizing Committee clarify their position on these issues as soon as possible.
National Network of Korean Civil Society for Restoration of Four Major Rivers Provincial Civil Committee against Golf Courses in Gangwon Province
Gangjeong Village Association
Jeju Islanders in the Mainland Caring for Gangjeong
National Network of Korean Civil Society for Opposing to cable car in National Park
Military Bases Peace Network (Gunsan US Military Airbase Retake Civil Movement)
Counseling Office of U.S. Base Victims in Gunsan
The National Campaign for Eradication of Crime by U.S. Troops in Korea
Pyeongtaek Peace Center
Peace Nomad
Green Korea United
NANUM MUNHWA
Cultural Action
Korean Confederation of Trade Unions
Life Peace Fellowship
Seoul Human Rights Film Festival
Civil Society Organization Network in Korea
Center ‘Dle’ for Human Rights Education
Korea Human Rights Foundation
Jeju Council of Social Issue
Jeju Pan-Island Committee for Stop of Military Base and for Realization of Peace Island
National Network of Korean Civil Society for Opposing to the Naval Base in Jeju Island
Jirisan Action Network
Jirisan Netwoks
Institute for Sustainable Society
People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy
Pastoral committee of Environment in Seoul Diocese
Catholic Human Rights Committee
Korea Culture Heritage Policy Research Institute
Korea Institute For Peace Future
Korea Wetland NGO Network
Korea Alliance for Progressive Movement
The National Network of Environmental Organisation of Korea
Green Korea Gongju
Green Korea Kwangju
Nation Park Conservation Network
KCEMS Korean Christian Environmental Movement Solidarity
Korean Network for Green Transport
Green Future, Green Korea United
Green Korea Daegu, Green Korea Daejeon
Green Korea Busan, Citizens Alliance for Bundang Ecosystem
Buddhist Environmental Solidarity
Forest for Life, Korean Ecoclub
Eco-Horizon Institute, Suwon Eco Center
Energy Peace
Eco Buddha
Korean Women`s Environmental Network
Good Friends of Nature – Korea
Cheonji Boeun Environmental Group of Won Buddhism
Green Korea Wonju
Indramang Life Community
Green Korea Incheon
Back to Farm National Movement Headquarters
Jeju Solidarity for Participatory Self-government and Environmental Preservation
Nature Trail-For the Beauty of This Earth
The National Council of YMCA‘s of Korea
National Young Women’s Christian Association of Korea
Korea Resource Recycling Federation
Environment and Pollution Research Group
Korean Teacher’s Organization For Ecological Education And Action
Pastoral Committee of Environment in Seoul Diocese
Korea Federation for Environmental Movement
Citizens’ Movement for Environmental Justice
————————————————————————————————–
OPEN LETTER #3: IUCN OFFICIALLY BLOCKS PARTICIPATION BY JEJU VILLAGERS WHO OPPOSE NAVAL BASE CONSTRUCTION NEAR CONVENTION
The following statement is the 3rd of 3 open letters mailed to the leadership of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature. It was originally posted here.
TO:IUCN Leadership, Participants, and Global Environmental Organizations
FROM:Emergency Action Committee to Save Jeju Island
IUCN leadership still refuses to criticize Korea’s destructive naval base, though construction work is killing rare soft corals, numerous endangered species (including from IUCN’s Red List), and destroying indigenous communities and livelihoods. This stance from IUCN defies its traditional mission, conserving nature and a “just world.”
NEW RESOLUTIONS ARE NEEDED FOR EMERGENCY VOTE OF ALL IUCN MEMBERS
********************************
ABOUT A MONTH AGO, this committee was joined by dozens of co-signers from around the world, in circulating open letters to the leadership of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), and its associated members. The statements were remarking on recent actions of IUCN that directly conflict with its important historical mandates.
While continuing to proclaim its devotion to protecting Nature, including the planet’s endangered places and species, IUCN leadership has ignored or whitewashed projects that are assaulting these wonders, and undermining human rights and sustainable livelihoods. For example, the organization inexplicably planned its giant September convention only a few minutes’ bus ride from one of the world’s great current outrages—the construction of a large new naval base near the village of Gangjeong, on Jeju Island, the “jewel” of South Korea. The naval base project, meant to become home-port for Korean and U.S. missile-carrying warships 300 miles from China, is threatening one of the planet’s last great soft coral reefs, and other coastal treasures, killing numerous endangered species (including one on IUCN’s famous Red List), and destroying centuries-old sustainable communities of local farmers and fishers. The Gangjeong villagers have been protesting the base project for years, and are being met with daily police brutality. Such activities represent all that IUCN has traditionally opposed.
Then, a few days ago (August 22), an official letter arrived from IUCN leadership informing the indigenous villagers that their application to host a small Information Booth at the convention was denied, though dozens have been granted for corporations and other groups. No explanation was offered. (More details below.)
In our earlier communiques we referred to public statements from IUCN Director-General, Julia Marton-Lefevre, supporting the Korean government’s environmental policies, including its decisions vis-à-vis the military base and the infamous Four Rivers Project (also discussed below.)
Her praise encompassed the government’s seriously flawed “Environmental Impact Assessment” (EIA) for the base project. This, despite that the EIAignored three of the most critically endangered species at Gangjeong, the Red-footed Crab,Sesarma intermedium; the Jeju Freshwater ShrimpCaridina denticulata keunbaei), endemic to Jeju Island, and the Boreal Digging Frog pictured here (an IUCN Red-List species.) It also ignored effects upon Korea’s only pod of Indo-Pacific Bottle-nosed Dolphins which swim regularly through the area. Neither did it explore crucial impacts upon 40 species of soft coral, including nine that are seriously endangered, and five that are already protected by CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora). This activity takes place only 250 meters from a UNESCO Biosphere Reserve, Tiger Island.
(In an upcoming letter we will report on a far more authoritative environmental impact statement now being conducted, secretly, by a team of well-known, non-governmental volunteer scientists from several countries—some with prominent IUCN member organizations. They have already documented a spectacular enormous coral garden, 7.4 hectares large, within a mile of where the destruction is now advancing. The only other place in the world where there may exist a soft-coral forest of this magnitude is in the Red Sea. (The divers are operating secretly because the government deported several prior researchers.)
On a related matter, the Director General has praised the government’s “Four Rivers Restoration.” Alas, however, this is not “restoration.” As the Korean environmental community has made clear, it’s a re-routing of Korea’s four great wild, winding rivers into straight-line channels, partly encased in concrete, combined with extensive dam building, and dredging, to make them more business-friendly. The effects on riparian communities are devastating. In four years the population of Korea’s migratory birds, such as white-naped cranes, has been reduced by two-thirds and in many areas, the rivers have become algae-infested cesspools. At the recent Ramsar Convention in Bucharest (July, 2012), the World Wetlands Network announced a “Grey Globe Award” to the Four Rivers project, ranking it among the five worst wetlands projects in the world. The IUCN community should publicly denounce it, too.
Throughout the run-up to the Convention, neither Director-General Marton-Lefevre, nor President Ashok Khosla, has expressed any disapproval of the above ongoing assaults on Nature. Neither have they made mention of the police beatings and arrests of the indigenous protestors from Gangjeong village who are trying, every day, to protect Nature’s treasures from being destroyed—activities that the IUCN was actually created to protect.
90% AGREEMENT
The response to our earlier e-mailers was enormous, with at least 90% of respondents supporting our positions—including many from mid-level IUCN leadership. In a brief burst of democratic openness, the IUCN’s web-page reprinted our letters, while responding with generalities about its great concern for Nature, and democratic process, and it opened the page for public comments. But after the first 20 comments appeared, all of them critical of IUCN’s position, the responses were erased off the page. On the other hand, the Korean government’s manifesto on its dubious “green” development policies continues to be displayed. So much for democracy.
IUCN also announced that it will propose that attendees pass a proclamation (“Nature+”)concerning the glories of Nature, but which still does not mention what’s going on ten minutes away, and while also denying permission for the local community to formally state their views in the Congress meetings. Up to this moment, the leadership of IUCN continues to avoid any expression of concern or even awareness of the impacts on Nature and community, just down the street, though such concerns are central to the organization’s mandate.
Why is IUCN leadership remaining so silent?For the leadership, it may be more of a financial and political matter than one of conservation or social justice, which is what IUCN was supposed to be about. There is also an underlying reality:A large percentage of the cost of this WCC convention in Jeju is being covered by the very people building the military base. Those would be the Korean government, and several giant global corporations, notably Samsung.
Having accepted the funding, it is difficult to criticize the funders.
IUCN’s top leadership has apparently determined its best course now is to avert its gaze while the government kills the shrimps and the frogs, destroys the corals, and jails the protesting local farmers. Meanwhile, IUCN can freely proceed with its great meeting next door to save Nature.
But the organization has gone still further. IUCN has granted the Korean government (the “Korean Organizing Committee of the 2012 WCC,” the chair of which, is Lee Hongkoo, the former Prime Minister of Korea, a supporter of the base) approval-power over any South Korean organizations wanting to present alternative views. These include whether to grant permission to speak on the issues at the meeting, even when they are invited to do so by bona-fide IUCN member organizations, or merely to host an information table at the event. (See #2 below.) IUCN has also agreed to partner with its Korean financial sponsor in constructing and presenting the formal program of the Convention. So now, the government, eager to advertise its green initiatives, will be represented on every one of the five “prime-time” plenary panels of the convention, either by government or corporate officials. It is the only country in the world to be so privileged. None of those panels will focus on the Gangjeong military base construction, or the Four Rivers fiasco.
Finally, the questions become these: Whose IUCN is this? Does the complicity of IUCN leadership truly represent IUCN membership? Can anything useful still be achieved at the WCC in Jeju? On the latter point, we actually think YES, there still is. We call upon the IUCN participants to use the occasion to take stands on the following:
FOUR STEPS TO CHALLENGE MILITARY BASE DESTRUCTION & TO RE-ESTABLISH IUCN’S HISTORIC MISSION TO PROTECT NATURE AND HUMAN RIGHTS
#1. Assembly Resolutions: Shut the Base; Make a New EIA; Stop the Four Rivers Project.
Since our prior letters, our committee has become aware of the great work of several independent groups of environmental attorneys, representing IUCN-member organizations. They are working toward a series of Draft Resolutions to be presented at the WCC Assemblies, including all members. Among them are these:
Shut the Base. The first Resolution will demand that Korea end its military base construction, and that all ravaged lands be restored to their former condition. The Resolution will speak in behalf of the endangered species, the rare soft corals, the sacred sites, and the local villagers who are putting their lives on the line to protect these treasures.
The once-celebrated southern Jeju coastline is now being covered in concrete, thanks to the Korean government, Samsung corporation, and the silence of IUCN.
It will also describe the many IUCN rules and prior decisions that have been violated. These include, for example, the important principles of the Earth Charter passed by the 2004 Congress, as well as the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, the Convention on Biological Diversity, the World Heritage Convention, the UN Declaration on Human Rights, the International Covenant on Economic and Social Rights, among many others.
New Environmental Impact Assessment. A second Resolution may demand preparation and acceptance of a new Environmental Impact Assessment of the naval base construction near Gangjeong—free of government control and censorship—that will include a truly accurate assessment of the dredging and other impacts on the soft coral reefs, and the killing of rare species that are all absent from the government’s document. (As indicated above, a new independent EIA is already being prepared by several outraged IUCN scientists.)
End The Four Rivers Project. A third Resolution will demand that Korea immediately discontinue its notorious Four Rivers Restoration project, and begin to actually restore the great rivers to their prior condition.
There is one potential complication. Unsurprisingly, the attorneys were told by some IUCN management not to bother with these motions. They will be “too late,” past deadline, they were told. And yet, the historical record of IUCN offers many examples of last minute submissions. They have always been permitted if they raise new, urgent, unforeseen issues, and if at least ten IUCN members co-sponsor the request. There are already more than ten willing IUCN co-sponsors. And they certainly qualify as urgent new matters for IUCN. If we don’t stop this destruction now, by the time IUCN meets again in four years, the corals, the Boreal Digging Frogs and other species, and many local people will be dead. We must not let that happen.
#2. Let the Gangjeong People Speak.
Information Booth Crisis. As briefly mentioned above, the Gangjeong villagers, working to save habitats, biodiversity, and the Red-List species from the military’s destruction, applied a few months ago through official IUCN channels for permission to set up one “information booth” among the dozens of others that have been okayed within the convention center throughout the meeting. That would seem a benign enough request, but a runaround ensued. Instead of routinely okaying the application, the IUCN passed it to the Korean government (the KOC, mentioned above) which is heavily invested in silencing any and all opposition to the base or the Four Rivers project. Korean newspapers have also been silenced on these matters. Repeated efforts over recent weeks to confirm permission for the information table were ignored. Finally, a few days ago, they received an official letter from the Director of IUCN’s Constituency Support Group, Enrique Lahmann. He said this: “Unfortunately, we are not able to accommodate your request for an exhibition booth at the WCC.” That’s it. No reason was given. And no explanation of how this fullfills official IUCN proclamations of democracy and inclusiveness.
No Protest Allowed Within Two Kilometers. Meanwhile, the Korean government announced that it would not permit any demonstrations or even picketing within two kilometers of the Convention. So, no information table inside. No demonstrations outside. Where are we again? Isn’t South Korea supposed to be a democracy?
During the upcoming Assemblies, IUCN leaders must at last denounce the government for these appalling moves, and permit the villagers, who are actually doing IUCN’s work, to not only have their information table inside the convention, but if they so choose, to go ahead and demonstrate freely outside, just as if this were a democratic society.
Addressing the Full Assembly. All of the above is not enough. The Gangjeong community should be permitted —-no, invited by IUCN leadership—to address the opening and/or closing plenary of the IUCN convention, to provide the full story of this local disaster and what they are going through. If the government resists, the IUCN leadership should insist. We all need to hear from the indigenous local farmers and fisher-people, and the custodians of the sacred sites, about what they have seen and experienced. Everyone needs to hear this. After all, we are meeting on their indigenous soil, on their island, on the coast that has nurtured them for thousands of years. So, our own group inquired as to the possibility of the villagers speaking at the assembly, but we were told by IUCN officials, as above, that all South Korean presenters have to be approved by the government.
Here’s some good news. Several IUCN member groups have already (quietly) invited local leaders to participate in some of the groups’ own scheduled workshop panel time to tell the Gangjeong story. (In our next letter, we will brief you on who is speaking and at what time. By delaying this announcement, we hope to avoid government crackdowns against the groups.)
#3. Go Visit the Destruction Sites, and the Sacred Sites.
Members of our committee, and our Korean colleagues, will be arranging tours of Gangjeong village, the sacred sites that are threatened, and the front-lines of the ongoing confrontation between the villagers and the police at the construction site. It is horrifying and inspiring. (If you want to join those outings, please respond gangjeongintl@gmail.com.) It’s very easy to get there—ten minutes by local bus.
#4 Institutional Self-Examination.
Finally, we suggest that all IUCN members take this moment to assess what is happening in Jeju, and to initiate a process of institutional self-examination, questioning and re-organization. None of us can afford to lose the moral and ethical leadership of one of the world’s greatest organizations. We need to do whatever is necessary to assure that IUCN will revive its historical mandate to place Nature first, and to protect social justice.
Thank you for your attention.
Please let us know if you want to see the proposed resolutions; we will forward you the final texts when they are complete. We can also forward you the new independent Environmental Impact Assessment, when it is completed. And you can sign up for a visit and tour of Gangjeong Village and the military construction site. (OUR EMAIL ADDRESS IS BELOW.)
EMERGENCY ACTION TO SAVE JEJU ISLAND ORGANIZING COMMITTEE:
The villagers fight illegal dredging, base pollution destroys crops, and activists point out the irony of IUCN’s choice of Samsung as one of its leading sponsors.
English and other non-Korean language Media coverage of Gangjeong Village’s anti-base struggle, from 2007-Present (If you know of links that are not here let us know!)
