Constitutional Court Upholds 10-Year Voting Ban for Election Offenders with Suspended Sentences

[Financial News] The Constitutional Court of Korea has ruled that the provision of the Public Official Election Act, which restricts the right to vote for 10 years for those who receive a suspended sentence for election crimes, does not violate the Constitution.
According to the legal community on the 28th, the Constitutional Court of Korea reached a 5-4 decision to uphold the constitutionality of the relevant part of Article 18, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 3 of the Public Official Election Act, following a constitutional complaint filed by Pastor Jeon Kwang-hoon of Sarang Jeil Church.
In 2018, Pastor Jeon was sentenced to six months in prison with a two-year suspended sentence for violating the Public Official Election Act, resulting in a 10-year ban on electioneering. Despite this, he was later convicted and fined 2 million won for campaigning in support of a particular presidential candidate at his church in 2021.
During the trial, Pastor Jeon filed a constitutional complaint, arguing that the provision of the Public Official Election Act restricting voting rights violates both the right to vote and the right to equality. The Act stipulates that those convicted of election offenses with a fine of 1 million won or more are barred from voting for five years, while those with a suspended sentence face a 10-year restriction.
The majority of five justices stated, "To prevent the risk of fraudulent elections and ensure fair elections, it can be effective to prohibit election offenders from participating in the formation of governing bodies for a certain period." They added, "The regulation suspending voting rights for a certain period for those convicted of election offenses cannot be deemed unconstitutional as an infringement of citizens' voting rights."
They further explained, "Although voting rights are restricted for a certain period, this limitation arises from the individual's own criminal conduct. The public interest in ensuring fair elections outweighs the disadvantage to personal rights resulting from the inability to exercise voting rights."
In contrast, Chief Justice Kim Sang-hwan and Justices Kim Bok-hyeong, Jeong Gye-seon, and Ma Eunhyeok dissented, stating, "The criteria for restricting voting rights are uniform and the duration is excessively long, violating the principle of proportionality and infringing upon the right to vote."
They pointed out, "Treating all election offenders with suspended sentences in the same manner contradicts the constitutional requirement that restrictions on voting rights be kept to a necessary minimum. Imposing a blanket 10-year ban, even for relatively minor offenses, undermines the function of social sanctions proportional to the degree of responsibility."

jisseo@fnnews.com Seo Min-ji Reporter