South Korea, world's largest ‘baby exporter', admits to human rights violations to meet demand
A South Korean commission has accused successive governments of committing widespread human rights violations by enabling mass overseas adoption of at least 170,000 children, often through fraudulent and coercive means.
The Truth and Reconciliation Commission released its findings on Wednesday after nearly three years of investigating complaints from 367 of the about 140,000 South Korean children sent to six European countries, including Denmark, which urged Seoul to probe the adoptions in 2022, as well as the US and Australia.
It found that local adoption agencies collaborated with foreign groups to mass export South Korean children, driven by monthly quotas set by overseas demand.
Many adoptions occurred through dubious or outright unethical means.
The commission determined 'the state violated the human rights of adoptees protected under the constitution and international agreements by neglecting its duty to ensure basic human rights, including inadequate legislation, poor management and oversight, and failures in implementing proper administrative procedures while sending large numbers of children abroad'.
The report released on Wednesday covered the first 100 of the 367 complaints submitted by adoptees taken abroad between 1964 and 1999.
The adoptees, from 11 countries, had long suspected their adoptions were tainted by corruption and malpractice, concerns widely shared within the Korean adoptee community.
The commission concluded that 56 of the 100 adoptees were 'victims' of state negligence, which constituted a violation of their rights under the South Korean constitution as well as international conventions.
It noted that South Korean agencies were given sweeping authority over children, including full guardianship and power to approve foreign adoptions. Such lack of oversight led to large-scale inter-country adoptions, with many children losing their true identities and family histories due to falsified or fabricated records.
South Korea has sent nearly 200,000 children abroad for adoption since 1953, making it the largest source of inter-country adoptees in the world. In the Asian country's impoverished postwar years, the government prioritised overseas adoptions over developing a domestic welfare system, relying on private agencies to send children abroad in exchange for fees from adoptive families.
'Numerous legal and policy shortcomings emerged,' commission head Park Sun Young said. 'These violations should never have occurred.'
Peter Moller, a South Korean adoptee from Denmark who led an international campaign for an investigation, told The New York Times that the truth commission's report acknowledged 'that the deceit, fraud, and issues within the Korean adoption process cannot remain hidden'.
The commission found that many children were sent abroad for adoption with 'falsified or fabricated' identities and family histories, often without legal consent.
Adoption agencies, such as the Korea Social Service, misrepresented children's backgrounds to their adoptive families and profited from the process.
They charged high fees and used the funds to acquire ever more children, the commission pointed out, making adoption 'a profit-driven industry' in which children were treated like cargo.
South Korea's government has never directly acknowledged responsibility for such adoption practices.
As of Thursday morning, Associated Press reported, the health and welfare ministry said it had not yet formally received the commission's report but would 'actively review' its recommendations.
It added that 'efforts to improve the adoption system will continue', citing its preparations to enforce a new law taking effect in July designed to strengthen the state's responsibility over adoptions.
The commission said the government had 'actively utilised' foreign adoptions, which 'required no budget allocation', instead of investing in a social safety net for vulnerable children.
At a press conference on Wednesday, Yooree Kim, sent to France by an adoption agency at the age of 11 without the consent of her biological parents, urged the commission to strengthen its recommendations.
She called on the government to promote broader DNA testing for biological families to improve the chances of reunions with their children and to officially declare an end to foreign adoptions.
She said that adoptees affected by illicit practices should receive 'compensation from the Korean government and adoption agencies, without going through lawsuits'.
In keeping with its findings, the commission recommended the government issue a formal apology, provide remedies for the affected, and ratify The Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Cooperation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption.
'It's been a long wait for everybody,' Han Boon Young, one of the 100 adoptees whose cases were heard by the commission, told CNN. 'And so now we do get a victory. It is a victory.'
Ms Han, who grew up in Denmark, said that she was not officially recognised as a 'victim' due to a lack of documentation.
'If they say, we recognise this is state violence, then how can they not recognise those who don't have much information? Because that's really at the core of our issues, that we don't have information,' she told CNN. 'It's been falsified, it's been altered.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ITV News
2 hours ago
- ITV News
What does the Casey report say about grooming gangs in the North East?
The government has confirmed there will be a national inquiry into grooming gangs. An independent audit of the issue was ordered by the Prime Minister in January, carried out by Baroness Louise Carey, and published on Monday (16 June). She found disproportionate numbers of Asian men have been responsible for group-based child sexual abuse, but the authorities have "shied away" this, for fear of appearing racist or raising community tensions. The 197-page report contains a relatively small number of references to the North East. In a timeline of grooming gang cases around the country, it notes how, in 2013, Northumbria Police set up Operation Sanctuary to investigate allegations of the sexual exploitation of girls and young women in Newcastle. In 2015, a serious case review was commissioned, after it emerged there were potentially hundreds of victims of sexual exploitation in Newcastle, including children and vulnerable adults. In 2017, 18 people were convicted of nearly 100 total offences including rape, child prostitution, supplying drugs to victims and trafficking for sexual exploitation. The offences took place in Newcastle between 2010 and 2014. The perpetrators were men of Albanian, Kurdish, Bangladeshi, Turkish, Iranian, Iraqi, Eastern European and Pakistani ethnicity, aged between 27 and 44. One woman was convicted. The victims were girls and young women, aged between 13 and 25. In 2018, a serious case review into child sexual exploitation in Newcastle was published. It found: "With this particular model of abuse, whilst the individual beliefs of the perpetrators are not known, all appear to come from a non-white, predominantly Asian/British Minority Ethnic culture or background.' The review recommended that the government commissioned research on the offenders' profiles, motivations and cultural and background influences. In 2024, the members of a Newcastle grooming gang were jailed for raping a 13-year-old girl. Three of the men were from Syria, and one from Kuwait. They were aged between 15 and 21 when they abused the victim in 2018 and 2019. The Casey report says that "more often than not" local reviews into grooming gangs "do not discuss the perpetrators, let alone their ethnicity or any cultural drivers". It says the 2018 review carried out in Newcastle was an exception to this, recognising the lack of research which had been done into the cultural drivers of offending, and recommending the government conducted research. Casey says the Newcastle review took "an unusual step" of trying to understand the crimes by interviewing one of the offenders, who had claimed asylum in the UK. He spoke in a derogatory way about British girls, saying they had a lack of morals, and spoke about how he had easily been able to access sex, drugs and alcohol. The Newcastle review said it was 'unfortunate that there were not more opportunities to meet with perpetrators and further attempts, if successful, might lead to greater understanding". Casey's report also says child sexual exploitation in Newcastle was an example of how taxis have often been used as a way for perpetrators to meet victims, and for them to be trafficked to different locations. The Casey report makes one reference to Sunderland, where it says a local review into a case of child sexual exploitation involving multiple offenders did not state the perpetrator's ethnicity or nationality. There is also one reference to Middlesbrough, listed alongside other towns and cities where Casey is aware of high-profile prosecutions, indicating "a wide geographical spread of cases involving Asian/Pakistani perpetrators across the country". Casey's report says: "There is a significant mismatch between the high volume of reports of child abuse being made to the police and the number of assessments which identify child sexual abuse coming into children's services in England". As an example, between March 2023 and March 2024, it says Durham Police recorded 8.19 contact child sexual abuse cases per 1,000 children, while Durham County Council only had 1.59 child in need assessments for child sexual exploitation and 2.78 for child sexual abuse per 1,000 children.
ITV News
3 hours ago
- ITV News
'All communities' want to see grooming gangs punished, says Council leader
A Council Leader has said that all communities want nothing more than to see the members of grooming gangs "punished to the full extent of the law." Oldham Council Leader Arooj Shah welcomed a national report from Baroness Louise Casey, which looked at the scale of grooming gangs across the country and the failure to recognise how ethnicity affected local investigations. Cllr Shah said: "So clearly on the back of Baroness Casey's report, she made it very explicit and clear that there was, she felt her findings found that there was some reluctancy to discuss ethnicity. "Child Sexual abuse is perpetrated by people of all races and religions, and inflicted on people of all races and religions. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't ask questions about any drivers of this very specific type of offending. "We need to do more to understand why this particular pattern of abuse is more prevalent among some groups of men. "To say so is not racist. What is racist is to suggest that all Pakistani men are groomers or the implication, the suggestion, that any one community condones this behaviour - it does not. "Nobody I have spoken to, from any community, wants to see anything other than for these men to be punished to the full extent of the law." The report criticised local authorities for failing to understand the nature and scale of young girls being exploited. Oldham has been the subject of a number of investigations into grooming gangs and sexual exploitation dating as far back as 2006. Responding to the report, Cllr Arooj Shah said: "In Oldham, we recognise the failings of the past and are determined not to repeat them. "We apologise again to those who were failed and thank the survivors who have been bravely telling their stories to not let these injustices go forgotten. "Baroness Casey has shone a bright light on uncomfortable and distressing issues that will now help us navigate a path to protect our children. Anyone who cares about the safety of children should read and digest this report. "All agencies with responsibility for safeguarding children should implement its recommendations in full." A local review published in 2022 found that Greater Manchester Police (GMP) and Oldham Council had failed a number of young girls who became the victims of grooming and child sexual exploitation. At the time, both organisations said they were "deeply sorry" to all those affected. Baroness Casey's National Audit found that the ethnicity of those involved in grooming gangs has been "shied away from" by authorities, and there was enough evidence in Greater Manchester that there was "disproportionate numbers of men from Asian ethnic backgrounds amongst suspects for group-based child sexual exploitation". While Cllr Shah said investigations should not shy away from asking why patterns abuse are more prevalent in certain groups, she highlighted that it is not Oldham's South Asian community that needs to ask these questions but instead the authorities. She said: "I don't think there's anything about reflection or inward looking because that makes the assumption that there's been denial from a community about this."As far as the community's concerned, the Pakistani community, the South Asian community, is like any other community, a crime is a crime." Oldham Council became the subject of international headlines in January, after the Labour Government denied their request for a public inquiry. The refusal was criticised by Tech billionaire Elon Musk, sparking a wave of interest in grooming gangs in Oldham, which eventually gave way to calls for a UK-wide child sex abuse inquiry. The Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer initially denied this request, and instead set up a number of local investigations into individual towns across the country. However the latest review from Baroness Casey laid out a number of recommendations for the Government, one of which was to hold a full national inquiry that co-ordinates targeted local investigations into abuse. The Government has now accepted all of the recommendations including the inquiry; something which Oldham Council has welcomed. Cllr Shah said: "We share Baroness Casey's desire to see a national inquiry, which is why we requested one to be commissioned back in February. "reI hope that this report will make it clear that this must happen, for the sake of everyone affected by child sexual exploitation, and that survivors' voices will be at the heart of it. "We are working with the Home Office to understand how the local and national inquiries will align, and we are in conversation to get clarity and next steps." Cllr Shah also welcomed calls from a number of victims and activists, including former Greater Manchester Police detective Maggie Oliver, to see those who failed in their duties to safeguard victims face the justice system. She said: "I think absolutely anyone who has failed these young people, girls, women and boys need to be held to account. It's a huge shame on society that they haven't for this long... so anyone that's failed them absolutely should be held to account and be prosecuted."
The Independent
4 hours ago
- The Independent
The tide has turned against the European Convention on Human Rights
Something extraordinary has just happened. In March, Yvette Cooper, the home secretary, said that she was reviewing the way the European Convention on Human Rights was being interpreted by the courts. Three months later, no one will defend the convention as it is. Two more MPs joined the stampede to change it today: Jake Richards and Dan Tomlinson, two ambitious Labour backbenchers, have a joint article in The Times calling for 'reform' of the convention. It became clear that this was not just a matter of tactical positioning in British politics when nine EU leaders, led by the prime ministers of Italy and Denmark, published an open letter on 22 May to launch an 'open-minded conversation' about the 'interpretation' of the convention. They said: 'We have seen, for example, cases concerning the expulsion of criminal foreign nationals where the interpretation of the convention has resulted in the protection of the wrong people and posed too many limitations on the states' ability to decide whom to expel from their territories.' A week later, Richard Hermer, the UK attorney general, delivered a lecture that attracted attention for suggesting that Kemi Badenoch's wish to 'disengage' from the European court was like legal arguments made in Nazi Germany to 'put aside' international law. He had to apologise for that 'clumsy' analogy, which meant that hardly anyone noticed something else he said in the lecture, namely that Britain must be ready to 'reform' international agreements such as the convention so that they retain 'democratic legitimacy'. A few days later, Alain Berset, the secretary general of the Council of Europe, the body that oversees the convention and its court, and which as every Brexit pedant knows is separate from the European Union, said: 'We need adaptation. We need discussion about the rules that we want to have, and there is no taboo.' In just a few weeks, the debate has moved from 'how the convention is interpreted' to 'rewriting the convention itself'. Something is happening. It is almost as if European leaders have learned from their failure to give David Cameron reforms that would have enabled him to win the referendum and keep Britain in the EU. They have realised that they need to change the ECHR in order to save it. The transformation of the politics of the issue in the UK was confirmed last week, when Ed Davey said that he wouldn't be opposed to rewriting the convention. 'If you could do it collectively, working with the court, with European colleagues, yes, one could look at that,' he said. That is Ed Davey, leader of the Liberal Democrats, who fought a general election on a promise to cancel Brexit; the party that most venerates European institutions and international law. What is going on? Nigel Farage claims that he has changed the terms of the debate: that the liberal establishment is panicking because of his campaign against the ECHR. First, he forced Kemi Badenoch to harden her line, inherited from Rishi Sunak, of being prepared to repudiate the ECHR if necessary; now the government is trying to hold back the tide by reviewing the way the convention is interpreted or even amending it. This is not the whole story. I don't think Giorgia Meloni and Mette Frederiksen were prompted to publish their open letter by Reform's success in British opinion polls. They were responding to a genuine problem that has frustrated elected leaders for a long time. I remember Tony Blair being as irritated as his first-class temperament would allow at the Chahal decision of 1996 that made it hard for him to deport various criminals and terrorists. But the way the convention, especially article 8, the right to family life, has been interpreted, both by the European Court of Human Rights and by national courts, has become more of a problem in recent years. In Britain, the Telegraph has given the appearance of campaigning against human rights law by simply reporting a series of rulings by immigration tribunals. (Perhaps the most eye-catching use of the ECHR in recent months was the Albanian criminal whose deportation was halted partly because of his young son's aversion to foreign chicken nuggets.) This is not just a problem of how British courts interpret the convention, as the letter from nine EU leaders attests. The way that this issue plays out on the continent could, however, have an effect on the next British election. As Richards and Tomlinson point out, if 'progressives' don't 'shape the change', then the 'populist right' will. If the ECHR is redrafted in the next few years, it might take some of the wind out of Farage's sails – while also complicating Badenoch's plan to join Farage in the rejectionist camp. What an unexpected plot twist: that Keir Starmer, the barrister who edited a legal text book on the ECHR in 1998, should end up leading a government that rewrote the convention.
