Park Yeon-mi v. Strathae
-
Thank you your honor,
Good morning ladies and gentlemen of this court. I am Kim Young-moo (김영무), and I will be representing Ms. Yeonmi Park (박연미) in this very important case. On the 9th of July, the Community Duty Programme has been amended to require 8 hours of unpaid work with a penalty of removal of voting rights, a fine of at least 20 Copars, and deportation should the violator be a foreigner or jail for locals. My client believes that this program may be considered as slavery, which may be defined as forced underpaid or unpaid labour and therefore matches the provisions of the amendments in the program. The penalties for the program also violates Section XX of the UDoHR for removing the right to participate in elections. Ms. Park had been living in Strathae for 2 months before moving back to Reitzmag due to the oppressive laws and policies established by its government, including the Community Duty Program.
That is all I could say for now. Thank you
-
Thank you Mr Young-moo. The Court will now hear the opening statement of the the Solicitor representing the Government of Strathae, if presenting to this Court at present.
Andreas EKKA
Chief Justice of the ECoJ -
Thank you your honour,
I am as you know representing the government of Strathae. We believe the community duty programme is not forced labour or slave labour the reason is simple one can choose to not do their community duty if they want. However there is a strong belief in Strathaen society if one cannot contribute to the society that helps them they should not recieve its benefits. It is fair that unlessMs. Yeonmi Park does her community duty that she doesn't get to vote , doesn't get any public benefits or benefits of free labour to help her from the programme. Thos who don't contribute are not contributing to society are effectively leaching off society a society built around serving others. This is why the policy was extended to foreigners in the first place, because it was seen as unfair that some were benefiting off free labour from the programme through access to services where people volunteered their hours without putting in, I am sure the court will see this is reasonable , there is no compulsion to do community duty but if you choose not to do so there are consequences such as lack of access to services or the right to participate in the democracy we have, also we apply the same penalties to Strathaen born citizens so we are treating all equally.
Brónach Eilís MacCoinnigh -
Thank you, Mr MacCoinnigh, for your opening statement. The Court will now hear oral arguments from the side of the Claimant. Mr Young-moo, your rebuttal, if you please.
Benjamin STEYN
Chief Justice of the ECoJ -
Your honor,
My client firmly believes that the Community Duty Programme violates multiple sections of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The following list will provide reasoning for the violations.
- Section II. Human Dignity - The Community Duty Programme psychologically forces members of the Strathaean Society to work due to the deprivation of important rights and benefits and possible unreasonable detention.
- Section IV. Freedom from Slavery - The Community Duty Programme forces work to members of the Strathaean Society by threatening deprivation of freedom through detention.
- Section VII. Right to Equal Protection Under the Law - The Community Duty Programme has allowed the Government of Strathae or any local Strathaean to detain, harass, or deport any foreigner they seem to discriminate. The defendant claims that they are treating all equally despite the fact that there are numerous discrimination cases in Strathae.
- Section XX. Right to Democratic Governance - The Community Duty Programme deprived violators of the right to vote and participate in administrative affairs.
- Section XXI. Right to Working Conditions - The Community Duty Programme limits the choice of employment for law-abiding citizens.
That is all I can present for now.
-
"Thank you, Mr Young-Moo. The Court will now give Mr MacCoinnigh the change to rebute the Claimant's arguments."
Benjamin STEYN
Chief Justice of the ECoJ -
Mr MacCoinnigh: Your honour, I would suggest most of the arguments presented are highly flawed. The idea the programme psychologically forces people to take part in the Community Duty programme is false. The option to participate is voluntary , you can choose to opt out but however this comes with consequences. For fairness since most government programmes use community duty labour in some form by getting access to alot of government services would mean one could take advantage of the free labour without actually contributing so we restrict access to said services , also since onew is not contributing to society if they do not participate taking benefits would be benefitting from society without contributing hence benefits are lost if one does not participate in the Community Duty programme. We fine people for not taking part for the same reason the money goes to help the community as the person is not contributing in any way otherwise , there is no imprisonment unless this fine is not paid. Also we take the vote away so people don't benefit or get a say in a society they don't contribute to , anyone who contributes gets the vote.
We do indeed deport immigrants who don't follow these rules above , it is only fair since they are not contributing to society , if they refuse to follow the law and pay the fines for not participating in the programme it wouldn't be fair to let them stay since they obviously are no people who value contributing to the community. We have the right to set conditions for our immigration visas and we have chosen to set these to ensure every person has a positive benefit on society, under EU law we have the right to decide who lives and works in our borders , we have used this legally to ensure we only have the best immigrants.We are not treating anyone differently under law, as the laws apply equally to all.
-
"Thank you, Mr MacCoinnigh. The Court will now hear a rebuttal from Mr Young-Moo, who is also invited to present witneses and evidence to support his case."
Benjamin STEYN
Chief Justice of the ECoJ -
My Young-Moo is once again invited to deliver a rebuttal and present witnesses or evidence. If no statement is made, this court will proceed without a rebuttal.
Benjamin Steyn
Chief Justice -
European Court of Justice
Park Yeon-mi v. Strathae
Note: the following judgement was prepared and drafted by the Court preceding the Court elections of March 2022, and received consent from the current Chief Justice to publish its findings.
Justices Concurring:
- Benjamin STEYN
- Frans SVENSON
- Luis LOPEZ GUERRA
- Lygafaz ATHLABLOMAZEN
Justices Dissenting:
NoneJustices Recused:
None
CLAIMANT: Park Yeon-mi
DEFENDANT: Government of Strathae
Chief Justice Steyn delivering the opinion of the court.
The Claimant presented that the policy introduced by the Defendant requiring citizens to provide uncompensated and compulsory labour are in violation of Article V.IV-i(UDoHR) of the Constitution, prohibiting slavery and servitude. The Claimant further presented a breach of Article V.XX-ii(UDoHR) of the Constitution, prescribing the right of all to have equal access to public service.
The Court recognises the cases made by both parties, and rules by unanimous decision in favour of the Claimant.
The Court concurs with the Claimant that the Community Duty Program violates freedom from servitude as defined in the Unversal Declaration of Human Rights. The Court finds especially concerning the presented evidence showing the Defendant's attempts to compel by force and on penalty of the removal of democratic rights the participation in the Community Duty Program.
The Court does not concur with the Claimant that the Community Duty Program violates the right to equal access to public service, and accepts the Defendant's argument that one may choose not to participate in the Program. Nevertheless, the Court recognises that choosing not to participate results in serious detrimental consequences for those involved -- this, then, constitutes a breach of servitude prohibitions.
The Claimant further presented evidence suggesting additional breaches of several sections of the Universal Declaration of Human rights. These breaches were not listed in the original petition filed by the Claimant and as such were not considered in the judgement of the Court.
The Court nevertheless emphasises to the Defendant the discriminatory and oppressive nature of the Community Duty Program. Forcing individuals to provide unpaid labour to benefit the Defendant, on pain of a removal of their democratic rights, fines, imprisonment, or a combination, is a highly serious breach of the freedoms prescribed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
The Court therefore ORDERS the Defendant to CEASE the Community Duty Program with immediate effect. Any individuals currently enrolled in the Community Duty Program shall CEASE their unpaid work immediately without penalty or detriment, and no further individuals shall be enrolled in the Program at any time. The Court further ORDERS the Defendant to pay a fine of €20 000 000 for contempt of European Law.
