By Neha Dabhade
The recent detention and prosecution of Chairman Lee Man-hee, the 95-year-old leader of the Shincheonji Church of Jesus in the Republic of Korea, has generated significant international concern regarding the protection of freedom of religion or belief (FoRB), judicial impartiality, and the appropriate limits of state action in matters involving religious communities. While the criminal allegations against Chairman Lee remain subject to judicial determination and should be adjudicated solely through due process of law, the circumstances surrounding his continued detention and the public comments made by South Korea’s Minister of Justice have raised serious questions under international human rights standards. (1)
Freedom of religion or belief, guaranteed under Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which the Republic of Korea is a State Party, protects not only the right to hold religious beliefs but also the collective autonomy of religious communities to organize, worship, and practice their faith without discrimination or undue state interference. These protections extend equally to majority religions, minority faiths, and new religious movements. The legitimacy of these rights cannot depend upon the popularity, social acceptance, or theological standing of a religious community.
The detention of a 95-year-old religious leader on non-violent charges warrants careful scrutiny under the principles of necessity, proportionality, and humanity that underpin international human rights law. International standards governing pre-trial detention emphasize that deprivation of liberty should remain an exceptional measure rather than the norm, particularly where there is no demonstrable risk of flight, destruction of evidence, or interference with judicial proceedings. Reports indicate that Chairman Lee had cooperated with investigative authorities throughout the inquiry, making the continued resort to custodial detention difficult to reconcile with these principles. Human rights scholars have argued that such detention appears inconsistent with the proportionality requirements reflected in the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (the Mandela Rules) and the jurisprudence concerning arbitrary detention. (2)
Equally troubling are the public statements reportedly made by South Korea’s Minister of Justice, Jeong Seong-ho, announcing that “strict criminal punishment” was inevitable while the judicial process had only just commenced and invoking a biblical passage referring to “false prophets.” Such remarks risk undermining the constitutional principle of religious neutrality and the presumption of innocence, both of which are indispensable to democratic governance and the rule of law. Public officials entrusted with oversight of prosecutorial institutions bear a heightened responsibility to refrain from statements that may reasonably be perceived as prejudging ongoing judicial proceedings or expressing hostility toward a particular religious community. (1)
This case should also be situated within a broader global context. Across numerous democratic and authoritarian societies alike, religious minorities and newer faiths increasingly face criminalization, discriminatory regulation, administrative harassment, and public vilification. International experience demonstrates that once the state begins distinguishing between “acceptable” and “unacceptable” religions on ideological or theological grounds, the resulting precedents frequently erode protections for all religious communities. Freedom of religion or belief is meaningful only when it safeguards minority faiths as robustly as it protects established religious traditions.
South Korea has long been recognised as a constitutional democracy committed to pluralism, human rights, and the rule of law. It has also played an important role in international human rights institutions and has generally maintained strong legal protections for religious freedom. These achievements make it all the more important that any criminal proceedings involving religious leaders strictly conform to international standards of due process, equality before the law, and institutional neutrality. Criminal liability, where established, must rest upon credible evidence assessed through an independent judiciary rather than upon public sentiment, political pressure, or religious prejudice.
I therefore express concern over the continued detention of Chairman Lee Man-hee and urge the South Korean authorities to ensure that all judicial proceedings are conducted with scrupulous respect for due process, proportionality, and the presumption of innocence. I further call upon public officials to refrain from statements that may compromise perceptions of judicial independence or stigmatize any religious community.
The protection of freedom of religion or belief is ultimately a measure of the health of a democratic society. Defending this freedom does not require endorsement of the beliefs or practices of any particular religious movement. Rather, it requires an unwavering commitment to the principle that every individual and every religious community—regardless of size, social acceptance, or theological orientation—is entitled to equal protection under the law and to the full enjoyment of the fundamental rights guaranteed under international human rights law.
Reference:
(1): https://samoaglobalnews.com/detained-at-95-south-koreas-prosecution-of-a-religious-leader-draws-international-alarm/?utm_source=chatgpt.com “Detained at 95: South Korea’s Prosecution of a Religious Leader Draws International Alarm”
(2): https://www.citybuzz.co/2026/07/07/detention-of-95-year-old-religious-leader-sparks-international-criticism-over-south-koreas-justice-system/?utm_source=chatgpt.com “Detention of 95-Year-Old Religious Leader Sparks International Criticism Over South Korea’s Justice System”
