Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback National Human Rights Commission of Korea - Complaint Summaries

Case concerning the use of weapons for arrest [2008] KRNHRC 1 (1 January 2008)

The complainant claimed that prosecutors and prosecution investigators used taser guns
that delivered powerful electric shocks and a three-phase baton in the process of arresting
the complainant, so that he had injuries that would take four weeks to heal. After an
investigation, the Commission found that three prosecution investigators simultaneously
used the tasers against the complainant who was leaving home with a knife, and that the
prosecution investigators again fired two shots at the complainant and used force to arrest
him. It was confirmed that the complainant had injuries including a broken rib that would
take four weeks to heal.

The Supreme Prosecutors' Office insisted that the investigators have a right to use
devices including handcuffs and electrical clubs for arresting criminals, in accordance with
the Supreme Prosecutor's Office Regulations and the Rules on the Use of Investigation
Devices. However, the Commission responded that devices for arrest had to be used only
when there were explicit relevant legal provisions, not in accordance with administrative
rules such as the Supreme Prosecutor's Office Regulations, because the use of devices for
arrest by investigators clearly limited the fundamental rights of citizens. In particular,
tasers deliver a 50,000-voltage current for about five seconds to temporarily paralyze
people. Amnesty International recommended that electric shock weapons be used more
prudently.

The Commission admitted that the use of force was inevitable in order to arrest the
complainant. However, it pointed out that six prosecutors and prosecution investigators
who had taser guns and three-phase batons were able to develop more prudent arrests and
roundup plans in advance. The Commission concluded that prosecution investigators
excessively resorted to weapons by simultaneously firing three shots at the complainant, in
order to arrest the complainant, who did not resist, violating the principle of minimum use
of force and the freedom of body of the complainant.

Therefore, the Commission recommended that the Prosecutor General develop legal
grounds for devices for arrest currently used by the Prosecutors' Office, establish
guidelines on the use, management, operation of arrest devices and training for
investigators on the use of arrest devices, and give a warning to the prosecutors and
prosecution investigators concerned.