“Violation of the right to freedom of action and privacy of the infected person”
Korea’s National Human Rights Commission has submitted an opinion that “is unconstitutional”, citing reasons such as violation of privacy, to the Constitutional Court, which is examining whether certain provisions of the AIDS prevention law are unconstitutional.
The Human Rights Commission stated 9: “Articles 19 and 25 of the AIDS Prevention Act violate the principle of clarity and proportionality, violating the general right to freedom of action and privacy and freedom of people infected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). It’s in violation of the law, “he said.
Article 19 of the AIDS prevention law states that “infected persons must not carry out acts of transmission to others through blood or body fluids”. Violation of this rule is punishable by up to three years’ imprisonment. However, it was stressed that this regulation should be abolished because there is no risk of infection in reality, or even if the other party is not infected.
The United Nations AIDS agency, the United Nations AIDS Program (UNAIDS), has said that laws that specifically penalize HIV could negatively impact efforts to prevent, treat, manage and support HIV. HIV or violating the human rights of people living with HIV and other vulnerable groups. advised to abolish it. He also said there is a risk of criminalizing even if not disclosing HIV exposure and infection to the other party, even if this has not led to unintended transmission or HIV infection.
AIDS has long been the subject of social fear. However, with the introduction of antiretroviral therapy in the mid-1990s, it is now a chronic disease that can be managed. If an infected person takes an antiretroviral drug daily, the amount of HIV in the blood drops to an undetectable level. If the status is maintained, the virus will not be passed on to others.
The Human Rights Committee said: “The provisions of the AIDS Prevention Act violate the ‘principle of clarity’ of the criminal justice system due to the abstractness and breadth of the text.” It is also against the law. ” He also stated that it violates the general right to freedom of action and the privacy and freedom of people living with HIV as guaranteed by the Constitution.
This is the first time that the Constitutional Court has judged Article 19 and Article 25 (2) of the AIDS Prevention Act. A Human Rights Commission official said: “We expect the Constitutional Court to take an unconstitutional decision to eliminate prejudice and discrimination against people living with HIV and to advance in a society where the human rights of minorities are respected “.
