gisw13_chapters

For example, although the abovementioned“one million housewives” policy is noted for greatlyadvancing women’s internet access, it also facedheavy criticism that its intent was not to qualitativelyfoster women’s internet capacity as activeproducers of information; rather, the programmewas part of an effort to increase the number of consumersin the internet market to boost the economyfollowing the 1997 Asian economic crisis.Today, Korean women face a growing risk ofpersonal information leaks, which inevitably riseswith internet usage. Female victims of sexual anddomestic violence are especially at greater risk,as exposure of their private information can havea far greater and destructive impact on their lives.Surprisingly, Korea’s legal system does not protectthese women.On the contrary, the Korean government forciblycollects and accumulates the women’sinformation through the Integrated Social WelfareNetwork (ISWN), which was built to digitise socialwelfare work. This increases the risk of revictimisation.In this regard, this report will address theproblems with the government’s collection and accumulationof personal information from femalesexual violence victims through case examplesprovided by the Korea Sexual Violence Relief Centre.Based on this, this report will seek alternativesto construct an internet environment that upholdsthe legal and systemic rights of female victims andthe human rights of socially disadvantaged citizensin general.Practical challenges with the ISWN systemThe Korea Sexual Violence Relief Centre is a women’sorganisation that has provided counselling,legal and medical support for victims of sexual violencesince April 1991. The organisation has alsoworked to promote a human-centred sexual culturewith equality between the sexes, and the restorationof women’s human rights. It also operates the“Open Centre” which provides shelter for thosewho require immediate assistance due to violence,and supports their livelihood, rehabilitation andindependence.However, the organisation’s female victim supportservices faced a crisis when the governmentchanged its policy in 2010. Resulting from thechange, the government would provide support paymentsonly to shelters that register victims’ personalinformation in the ISWN. The required data includedthe victim’s resident registration number (RRN),which consists of the individual’s year and date ofbirth, sex, place of birth, and a verification number.Women’s organisations that support victimsof sexual and domestic violence and prostitutionprotested against the policy change, but the governmentenforced the new policy and announcedthat organisations that refuse to comply will nolonger be eligible for government subsidies. The KoreaSexual Violence Relief Centre in particular citedthe violation of female victims’ human rights andresisted the change. As of now, it is the only shelterfor female victims that refuses to register victims’personal information in the ISWN.At the time, the government’s bases for thechange were that ISWN will alleviate the workloadfor asset and income identification, and improveservice provision and welfare payment work. Thegovernment contended that if women registeredtheir personal information in the ISWN system,they would not have to endure tedious proceduresand visit multiple offices to receive livelihood andwelfare support. In addition, this would reduce thebureaucratic workload and raise efficiency in welfarework. Furthermore, the government intendedto gauge the victims’ current assets by callingup their personal information in the system, andgive proportional support to women with greaterneed. The system could prevent illicit or redundantpayment.However, the centre points out that the governmentis overlooking the fact that the new policy canhave a devastating effect on female victims. Thebiggest concern is that the change greatly inhibitsvictims’ rights to the privacy of personal information.The fact that the government forced the ISWNon victims whose lives are threatened and are hidingin shelters shows that the administration valuesefficient work processes over the human rights ofvictims.In the past, there have been many cases wheregovernment officials provided a perpetrator witha victim’s personal information. All too often, thisput victims and their social service workers atrisk. In an emergency situation, the fear that sucha scenario can come to pass is likely to strip thevictim of her capacity and right to make rationaljudgment. Most female abuse victims come tothe shelter as they require immediate refuge. Demandingtheir personal information and refusingto provide assistance until they acquiesce in effectdoes not allow them to make an autonomouschoice. Because of this, they are vulnerable tomaking rash judgments without fully understandingthe importance of their personal informationand the implications that their choice can have ontheir future.165 / Global Information Society Watch