“Kim Hye-jeong's Politics of Anti-Sexual Violence” Series: Shouting "Make Consent the Standard" in the Plaza on March 8th
By Kim Hye-jeong
Published: March 5, 2026
Translated by Se-young Kim
The voice on the other end of the line
was faint. She said she'd been questioned today on suspicion of making a false
accusation [of sexual assault]. I said, "Oh, I see..." A lump formed
in my throat. Knowing what it's like to be questioned as a suspect in a false
accusation case, I empathized with her pain which led her to call the
counselling center with shoulders slumped. I shared her grief and shock.
A retaliatory countersuit based on the allegation of false accusation presupposes a complete denial of the sexual assault.
If a high-ranking and powerful person in the workplace sues a victim of sexual harassment or assault for false accusations, it means the high-ranking person is denying the sexual assault. This means that situations unimaginable to the victim are already occurring within the company.
When a politician files a retaliatory
countersuit for false accusations, it's not just a simple complaint. They're
denying responsibility and using their entire network and resources to try to
subvert the issue of sexual violence.
The same thing happens when retaliatory
countersuits follow reports of sexual assault in high school.
A scene from the mock trial "Who Should Fear
False Accusations? A Victim's Counterattack Against a Sexual Violence
Perpetrator's Counterclaim," hosted by the Korea Sexual Violence Relief
Center. A trial on quasi-rape and false accusations was virtually re-enacted.
(Photo courtesy of the Korea Sexual Violence Relief Center)
Perpetrators who claim that “the other party consented”
As it is known, most denials of sexual
assault aren't about the basic facts. Claims like "I wasn't there" or
"I wasn't even sitting there" are rare. In most cases, it’s the right
person and the right sexual act, but the claim is that "the other party
wanted it, too."
The problem is that the actual
situation isn't that simple. Sexual violence in a home, where the victim
endures it silently because there are family members around; cases where
someone who has only been in a new place for a day, a month, or a year is
powerless to do anything to their assailant, a decision-maker there; situations
where they don't even know where they are; situations where they give up
because expressing resistance may make things worse and more dangerous;
situations where they resist by saying "no" or "I don’t want
it" or "I'm going to go" a dozen times and then desperately try
to lighten the mood in order to put an end to the situation; cases where the
other person knows they have nowhere else to go; sexual violence inflicted on
students by sports coaches or leaders of educational institutions; sexual
violence inflicted on believers by religious leaders.
For this reason, 70% of rapes involve
no explicit assault or intimidation. Of course, the victim's consent is also
absent. What kind of intervention is necessary in these cases? What we expect
from society is for it to unanimously condemn any sexual exploitation or
violations that take place under the guise of work, school, career, hobbies,
caregiving, religion, politics, or art.
What we expect from the system is to
rescue victims from the situation and prevent its recurrence.
What we expect from the law is to
provide and establish clear standards and interpretations to prevent the
perpetrator's unilateral distortion and shifting of responsibility.
The call to change the criminal law's
definition of rape so that it hinges on the absence of consent is also aimed at
this change. The current requirement for the victim to actively resist in order
for the act to be considered rape only accelerates inequality. Over 70 years
have passed. Even if it’s to clarify and prove the perpetrator's constant claim
of "consent," it's only right to shift the definition of sexual
violence to turn on the presence or absence of consent. This is just a starting
point.
This is because the formation and
expression of consent are social capacities. We must examine the circumstances
of victims who did not consent to sexual activity, or were unable to form or
express consent. This includes how abuse, economic and social status, mental
and physical disabilities, and alcohol or drugs can hinder consent. Changing
the criteria for rape so that it hinges on consent allows us to more clearly
understand and grasp the circumstances and conditions that make it impossible
for someone to consent. Rather than denying sexual violence, we can focus on
prevention and recurrence prevention.
A forum titled "From Doubt to Support -
Dismantling Counter-Accusations of Sexual Violence," hosted in 2018 by
"Ulim," a research institute affiliated with the Korea Sexual
Violence Relief Center. It discussed the instigation of counter-accusations in
sexual violence cases and the strategies employed by perpetrators. (Photo
courtesy of the Korea Sexual Violence Relief Center)
Who is the
“unjust victim” that the aides were worried about?
However, in Korea, reformation of the
rape law remains a long way off. Last year, on March 8th, Women's Day,
Rebuilding Korea Party lawmaker Jeong Chun-saeng and Progressive Party lawmaker
Jeong Hye-gyeong presented a revision in the 22nd National Assembly. However,
one year later, the bill still has not attracted the required ten co-sponsors
to enable its official proposal. Both the National Assembly and the current
administration are holding off on the revision. Why?
When I visited the offices of
lawmakers, the question I heard most frequently from several male aides, was,
"What if people unjustly become victims because of this revision?" It
wasn't about the current state of sexual violence, which occurs in various
situations and conditions, or the outdated conservative standards for sexual
violence and the criminal justice system. The top priority was potential
"victims” the law might wrong. Perhaps these were the "victims"
mentioned by former
Justice Minister Han Dong-hoon and People Power Party lawmaker Kwon
Seong-dong. What are they? Who are they?
The current legal standard for rape is
[the presence of] "violence or intimidation," and case law and
academic theory define it as including these at a level that is significantly
difficult to resist. Many cases are dismissed or not prosecuted because they
fall short of this standard. This is also a frequent reason for acquittals.
However, sexual violence occurs in a
variety of situations and conditions. In comparison, the criteria of "was
there clear violence or intimidation, or was resistance significantly
difficult?" are extremely narrow. It's as if there is no need to know the
actual circumstances of the sexual violence, and only extremely rare cases of
sexual violence may be recognized as such.
Those who are
pursuing countersuits and investigations of false accusations
Here is what happens in the chasm
between the reality of sexual violence and the legal definition of rape that
dates back to 1953: the false accusation countersuit. It is because while the
legal standard of recognizing rape only when the victim's resistance is
significantly noticeable remains, suspicion and distrust of rape victims
continue to be authoritative legal evidence.
When someone is accused of sexual
assault, they often countersues the
victim, accusing them of making a false accusation. And it's not just making a
false accusation. If the victim was an employee, they’re also accused of
embezzlement. If the victim was a friend or former lover who pressed for an
apology, it's stalking. If solely the victim was unmarried, it's a civil suit
by the perpetrator's spouse for adultery. They'll do anything to amplify
suspicions and distrust of the victim.
After the problems of countersuits for
false accusations entered public debate, in 2018, the Supreme Prosecutors'
Office and the Ministry of Justice distributed a manual for investigating
sexual assault cases that recommends suspending investigations into
countersuits until a definitive determination has been made regarding the
sexual assault case. However, in practice, there are many cases where
individuals are summoned for investigation into false accusation even before a
final decision has been made on whether to indict for sexual assault. Even
after the adjustment of investigative powers between the prosecution and
police, and even now when a system eliminating prosecutorial investigative
authority is being discussed, prosecutors frequently take action to recognize
and investigate false accusations, and sexual assault cases are frequently
included in these investigations. It is not uncommon for police to book a
person on charges of false accusations after deciding not to transfer their
sexual assault case to the prosecution.
In a court case last year, when a
victim filed a complaint of sexual assault against a man 10 years her senior,
whom she had met for the first time, the prosecution declined to indict.
Instead, they later indicted the victim for false accusation. After listening
to a recording of the sexual activity, the court ruled that the victim was
"not guilty" of the false accusation charge in both the first and
second trials, citing the victim's repeated refusals. The man had ignored the
repeated refusals and continued the sexual activity, even using physical force.
However, the prosecution refused to recognize this as sexual assault.
Instead, the victim had to struggle
desperately to clear herself of false accusations from the perpetrator, the
prosecution, and the court. In the "unjust victim" argument, most
frequently heard in the National Assembly, who is the "unjust victim"?
If it refers to the defendant in a sexual assault case, then we must understand
that such a simple designation amplifies suspicion against the victim and
justifies retaliatory countersuits for false accusations.
While the revision of the rape law is
on hold, countersuits for false accusations are on the rise. Isn't it suspicion
of the victim suspicion that's costing the law, the system, and society?
Meanwhile, any proposal to properly examine the reality of sexual violence is
fading away.
A National Assembly debate, "From Rape to
Non-Consensual Sex: The Significance and Challenges of Revisions to Japanese
Criminal Law," that presented a case study of the old Japanese criminal
law provision on rape, which Korea referenced [when creating its law in 1953],
being revised to non-consensual sex. (Photo courtesy of the Korea Sexual
Violence Counseling Center)
We will shout
together in the plaza on International Women's Day: "Revise the definition
of rape to be consent-based"
I had an in-depth conversation with the
person who was being investigated as a suspect of false accusation. There was
enough reason and evidence to indicate that what had happened was sexual
assault, but the perpetrator's power and status, which terrified the victim,
were also clear.
After a long conversation, I said,
"March 8th is Women's Day. Shall we meet in the plaza?" Perhaps it
was an odd change of subject? But as angry and despairing as I felt, joy crept
up in me. I still don't know if the victim will actually come to the plaza, if
we'll meet, or if we'll recognize each other if we do. But I will be hoping, as
I distribute the placards which I've prepared, that they would reach you.
"Revise the definition of rape to
be consent-based."
Even after the winter protests
surrounding Yoon Seok-yeol's impeachment and even after the inauguration of a
new administration and president, we will continue to call out for this change,
which remains under suspicion and on hold. We will do so alongside colleagues
who share their concerns every time we meet about the increasing number of
countersuits for false accusations, alongside victims who desire to live in
equality and peace as sexual citizens.
About the Author: Kim Hye-jeong. Since
2004, she has been learning about people and observing the world through her
experience in the anti-sexual violence movement. She believes that people who
understand sexual violence create a more thoughtful and liberated world. She is
currently the director of the Korea Sexual Violence Relief Center and a
full-time activist.
*Original article:
https://www.ildaro.com/10402
No comments:
Post a Comment