## Facts

- Yeo-Bum Yoon and Myung-Jin Choi were nationals of the Republic of Korea and Jehovah’s Witnesses.
- Both held sincere religious beliefs that forbade participation in military service “in any form.”
- After receiving draft notices, each refused to report for compulsory military service because of conscience and religion.
- South Korea prosecuted each man under article 88(1) of the Military Service Act, which criminalized refusal to perform military service “without justifiable reason.”
- Domestic courts rejected conscientious objection as a “justifiable reason,” reasoning in substance that an individual duty to follow conscience could not outweigh the constitutional and legal duty of national defense.
- Each author was convicted and sentenced to one year and six months’ imprisonment.
- Having pursued domestic remedies, the authors filed individual communications under the Optional Protocol to the ICCPR (communications nos. 1321/2004 and 1322/2004), represented by counsel Suk-Tae Lee.
- The Human Rights Committee joined the communications for decision because they raised substantially similar facts and law.
- South Korea argued that compulsory military service was needed for national defense and social cohesion, and that recognizing conscientious objection would harm these interests.
- At the time, South Korea did not provide a civilian alternative to military service for conscientious objectors.

## Issues

1. Whether criminal conviction and imprisonment of Jehovah’s Witnesses who refuse compulsory military service on grounds of conscience violates ICCPR article 18(1).
2. If the convictions limited the authors’ freedom to manifest religion or belief, whether that limitation was justified under ICCPR article 18(3) as necessary and proportionate to protect public safety or other listed interests, given the absence of alternative service.

## Decision

- The Human Rights Committee found that the authors’ convictions and imprisonment disclosed a violation of article 18(1) of the ICCPR.
- The Committee treated the punishment of the authors for refusing military service on religious grounds as a restriction on the manifestation of religion or belief.
- Although the restriction was based on law (Military Service Act art. 88(1)), the State party did not show that imprisoning conscientious objectors—while offering no civilian alternative—was necessary and proportionate under article 18(3).
- The Committee concluded that the State party had to provide the authors an effective remedy, including appropriate compensation.
- The Committee also stated that South Korea was obliged to take steps to prevent similar violations in the future, which pointed to recognizing conscientious objection and providing an alternative service option.
- The Views included appended individual opinions by two Committee members.

## Legal Principles

- ICCPR article 18 protects freedom of thought, conscience, and religion, and can cover refusal of military service where the refusal is based on sincere religious or conscience-based belief.
- Prosecuting and imprisoning conscientious objectors for refusal to serve is a limitation on article 18 rights and must satisfy article 18(3): it must be prescribed by law and necessary for a listed aim, using a proportionate means.
- General claims about national defense and social cohesion are not enough; the State must show why criminal punishment of nonviolent objectors, rather than less restrictive measures, is required.
- The absence of any civilian alternative service weighs heavily against a claim of necessity and proportionality, because it leaves objectors with only the choice between violating conscience and accepting criminal punishment.
- Under ICCPR article 2(3), when a violation is found in an individual communication, the State party must provide an effective remedy to the victims and take measures to reduce the risk of repeat violations.

## Conclusion

In *Yoon v. Republic of Korea*, the UN Human Rights Committee held that South Korea violated ICCPR article 18(1) by convicting and imprisoning two Jehovah’s Witnesses who refused compulsory military service for reasons of conscience, where the State provided no civilian alternative service and did not justify the punishment as necessary and proportionate under article 18(3).


Yoon v. Republic of Korea, CCPR/C/88/D/1321-1322/2004 (2007)