Anti-discrimination laws are for everyone, not only “minorities”

Considering the potential effects of two anti-discrimination bills proposed in the 22^nd National Assembly

 

By Park Ju-Yeon

Published Feb. 20, 2026

Translated by Marilyn Hook

 

In January of this year, the “Anti-Discrimination Act" was introduced in the National Assembly by Representative Son Sol of the Progressive Party. The following month, another "Anti-Discrimination Act" was proposed by Representative Jeong Chun-saeng of the Rebuilding Korea Party. An anti-discrimination act was first proposed as national legislation during the Roh Moo-hyun administration in 2007, but it was thwarted due to opposition from some religious groups. Multiple such bills have been submitted to the National Assembly since then, but each time they have been left to languish, without even a proper discussion, until they expired.

Without national laws against discrimination, problems such as the advent of "no-kids/no-senior zones," the exclusion of immigrants, anti-Chinese sentiment, misogyny, backlash against the movement for mobility rights waged by people with disabilities, and discrimination against LGBTQ+ people have intensified throughout society in recent years, and the resulting rifts between us have grown increasingly deep.

Therefore, the establishment of anti-discrimination laws is more important than ever as a minimum institutional mechanism to combat hatred. However, misinformation, baseless slander, and simple misunderstandings regarding such laws continue to spread, making negative perceptions of the legislation a major obstacle to its enactment.

Progressive Party lawmaker Son Sol [at podium] holding a press conference on Jan. 12, 2026 about her introduction of the first Anti-Discrimination Act to the 22nd National Assembly. (Photo credit: Assemblymember Son’s Facebook page)

On February 12, a forum titled "Let's Examine the Anti-Discrimination Act from A to Z" was held at the National Assembly Members' Office Building. Co-hosted by Assemblymember Son, the Progressive Party's Women & Mothers Committee, and the South Korean Coalition for Anti-discrimination Legislation (SKCAL), the event was organized as part of the "Series of Forums for the Enactment of the Anti-Discrimination Act in the 22nd National Assembly." Jang Ye-jeong, standing chair of SKCAL’s executive committee, served as the moderator for a panel of presenters comprising Hong Seong-su, a professor at Sookmyung Women's University and author of the book The Illusion of Not Discriminating; Assemblymember Sol; and Yeo Gyeong, leader of the Gender Equality Media & Anti-Discrimination Team at Womenlink.

A promise to protect all members of society

Presenting first, Professor Hong pointed out that “since the 2010s, Korean society has faced complex crises such as low economic growth and an aging population,” and then explained his analysis that “in these crisis situations, people began to seek scapegoats to alleviate their anxiety, which leads to the spread of hatred and discrimination against those they perceive as weaker than themselves or about whom they did not normally have a favorable opinion.”

The next problem is “the fact that these issues have not been resolved during the past ten years, or even seriously addressed.”

While the National Human Rights Commission Act defines what constitutes a human rights violation, it merely “outlines the concept of discrimination in roughly seven lines.” Professor Hong asked, "How can discrimination be explained in just seven lines of text?" He argued that legislation that properly explains and defines discrimination is needed, saying, "The concept of discrimination must be concretized through dozens of provisions in an anti-discrimination law so that citizens can understand what constitutes discrimination and prevent it, while victims can have the assurance of receiving redress."

Professor Hong also addressed the mistaken view held by some that anti-discrimination laws are "laws for minorities," explaining, "Anyone can become a minority depending on the situation." He continued, "Groups commonly perceived as minorities can, in some cases, hold the status of the majority, and conversely, groups with majority status can become minorities depending on the context. Furthermore, there are instances where a group that held the status of the majority yesterday might find itself in the status of a minority tomorrow."

Professor Hong emphasized, “This legislation is ultimately essential for all citizens living in this community.” He explained that anti-discrimination laws are a promise to protect all members of the community, even if not immediately, from discrimination they may face.

The Feb. 12 forum titled "Let's Examine the Anti-Discrimination Act from A to Z" held at the National Assembly Members' Office Building. (Photo Credit: South Korean Coalition for Anti-discrimination Legislation)

Current laws cannot address complex discrimination; Anti-Discrimination Act will protect women workers

The next speaker was Yeo Gyeong of Womenlink’s Gender Equality Media and Anti-Discrimination Team. She emphasized the necessity of the anti-discrimination legislation by stating, “A person is not defined solely by their gender identity… An individual’s identity is inevitably connected to diverse other factors such as region, age, education level, and employment status.”

Her argument was that "existing narrow anti-discrimination laws, such as the Equal Employment Opportunity Act, cannot on their own resolve all disadvantages arising from complex reasons, such as discrimination based on appearance or ideological screening during the hiring process; therefore, a comprehensive anti-discrimination law that regulates a variety of grounds [for discrimination] is necessary."

Ms. Yeo reminded forum attendees of instances in recent years where women have faced violence and exclusion for reasons such as revealing feminists beliefs upon questioning, following women's groups like Womenlink on social media, or “looking like feminists" because they have short hair. She explained, "With anti-discrimination laws, we will be able to look at such ideological screening and say, ‘This is something employers must not do,’ and ‘This is discrimination.'" She emphasized that enacting an anti-discrimination act is a process of creating another safety net for female workers.

Assemblymember Son, who proposed one of the bills, also stated that she drafted the legislation while deliberating on measures to prohibit discrimination in the labor sector, taking into account changes in employment patterns and the rise of precarious labor: “Because there are too many workers who do not count as ‘employees’ under the Labor Standards Act, we have ensured that various forms of ‘labor providers,’ such as platform workers [those who do gig work for digital platforms like delivery apps] and special employment workers [independent contractors for other types of businesses], receive legal protection.”

Assemblymember Son explained that the bill was designed to address new types of discrimination as well. She noted that "suspicions have been raised recently among delivery workers that the AI ​​assigning their work gives fewer tasks to women and the elderly," and argued, "The algorithms related to this must be disclosed, and we must verify whether the discrimination is actually taking place." She added, "We have also included acts of ideological screening [during recruiting] or harassment in the workplace, such as labeling people as 'commies' or 'femi' [a slur for feminists], as forms of discrimination.”

Fears of overuse of criminal punishment are unfounded; result of new laws is more likely to be prevention and harm remedying

One of the major misconceptions about anti-discrimination laws is that if they are enacted, criminal penalties will abound and freedom of expression will disappear, leaving people unable to say anything.

Professor Hong Seong-su explained, “In truth, it is difficult for someone to receive criminal punishment solely for committing discrimination.” He added that if criminal complaints are filed for discrimination, “the judiciary will have no choice but to make conservative judgments, which will result in an increase in not-guilty verdicts.”

Therefore, “setting up a discrimination rectification body—kind of like the National Human Rights Commission—and having it make recommendations and resolve the problem is considered the first-order solution.” Professor Hong explained, “Although the recommendations themselves would not be legally binding, the official acknowledgment of discrimination by a state agency would act as significant pressure on the companies or institutions involved, and even now, a high percentage—around 70% to 90%—of the recommendations are implemented [at the targeted organizations], private companies included.”

If the recommendations are ignored, the victim could then proceed with a civil lawsuit. Anti-discrimination laws could be utilized in such cases as well. “The persuasive arguments and evidence prepared during investigations by the National Human Rights Commission [usually] serve as highly favorable evidence for the victim in court, significantly increasing the chances of winning. Furthermore, the proposed Anti-Discrimination Act includes provisions for litigation support.”

In this way, the Anti-Discrimination Act would not immediately impose criminal penalties for everyday acts of discrimination themselves. However, it would strictly prohibit and include provisions for criminal punishment for imposing "retaliatory disadvantageous measures"—such as dismissal, forced transfer, or denial of promotion—on individuals who raise issues of discrimination. This establishes a mechanism to ensure that whistleblowers and victims can have the courage to report incidents without fear of future retaliation.

“LEAVE A POSITIVE COMMENT ABOUT THE ANTI-DISCRIMINATION ACT – NOW!” SKCAL is conducting a campaign asking citizens to leave comments [on the National Assembly website] in support of the anti-discrimination bill sponsored by Rep. Jeong Chun-saeng of the Innovation Party. The legislative notice period for the bill runs until February 24. Link: https://bit.ly/3OehBpK

The role and effectiveness of the anti-discrimination laws are more about prevention rather than punishment. Professor Hong Seong-su pointed out, “If bodies for addressing discrimination are established and bring about change through their proper functioning, then companies, universities, and so on will also set up human rights centers to handle discrimination issues internally.” Those bodies will also strive to prevent discrimination from occurring. “The fundamental purpose of the Anti-Discrimination Act is to create a structure that fosters this virtuous cycle,” Professor Hong emphasized.

Government must make plans to address and prevent discrimination

The panelists unanimously agreed that the effects of anti-discrimination laws could be varied and far-reaching. Ms. Yeo predicted, “If the Anti-discrimination Act is enacted, discriminatory expressions and messages in the media could also be reduced.”

“Although broadcasting and telecommunications deliberation standards already exist, there is a problem where, depending on who the commissioners are, they may decline to accept as an agenda item an issue that has been raised, or they may interpret the standards strangely [when addressing the issue]. It’s certainly significant that a basic law presenting specific standards for discrimination is [potentially] being established to enable the Communications Standards Commission to function properly.”

Anti-discrimination laws could also influence school education, according to Ms. Yeo: “If gender equality education or human rights awareness education related to discrimination is included in school curricula to enable discussions on difference and discrimination, rather than engaging personal attacks or taking sides, students can learn diversity and inclusion.”

Assemblymember Son cited the establishment of a national-level discrimination prevention plan as another major effect. Her bill includes provisions that “impose an obligation on the state to rectify discrimination and mandate that state agencies, such as the Prime Minister’s Office, establish a comprehensive plan every five years for the rectification and prevention of discrimination.” She added that not only establishing a plan but also “presenting goals aligned with the plan and enabling discussions on whether they are valid and realistic and so on” would be important parts of the process.

*Original article: https://www.ildaro.com/10393