In March 2007, a complainant known as Cho (a 35-year-old male) filed a complaint with the National Human Rights Commission of Korea (NHRCK), arguing that his human rights were violated when he was restrained with a rope and handcuffs while being investigated for the purpose of being transferred only from one office to another in a same police station. With regard to the complaint, the NHRCK recommended to the head of the " J" police station that the police officers involved be admonished to prevent recurrence of such incident.
In response to the complainant" s argument, the police officers concerned stated that the complainant had consistently expressed strong dissatisfaction with his being arrested and that they used handcuffs and a rope on him until completion of the investigation in order to prevent him from fleeing or inflicting a self-injury.
According to the findings of the NHRCK, the police officers conducted two rounds of investigation of the complainant, who had been detained in a detention house, in their police station in the morning and afternoon of the same day. During the first round of the investigation, they removed the rope from the complainant in response to repeated protests. During the afternoon investigation, they bound the complainant with a rope and handcuffed him until the end of the investigation.
Judicial police officers must allow arrested or detained suspects to fully exercise their right to self-defense without being psychologically strained during questioning. Such police devices as handcuffs and ropes should be used only when there are evident risks of flight, violence, disturbance, self-injury, and so forth.
The NHRCK did not discover any record corroborating that the complainant, while being detained in the detention house, attempted or posed a serious risk of attempting to escape, creating a disturbance, committing violence, or inflicting a self-injury. In addition, there were no circumstances substantiating that the complainant was about to flee or injure himself while being questioned as a suspect. It is a right of a criminal suspect to refuse to make any self-incriminating statement. Therefore, even if the complainant had refused to make any statement during a police investigation, applicable regulations prohibit police officers from using police devices on such grounds.
The NHRCK determined that the respondents" use of both handcuffs and rope against the complainant during the period from his release from the detention house to the completion of his questioning as a suspect was excessive given the degree of vague risks of his self-injury or flight. Thus, the NHRCK judged that such act represented a violation of the requirement of minimum damage, which should be observed when restricting personal freedom.
Accordingly, the NHRCK recommended that the police officers concerned be admonished since their restraint of the complainant with a rope and handcuffs during their investigation violated personal freedom as guaranteed under Article 12 of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea.
