The Korea Herald

지나쌤

Religious school activities violate freedom: Seoul Education Office

Conclusion follows probe launched after complaint of mandatory religious activities violating student rights

By Choi Jeong-yoon

Published : Oct. 20, 2024 - 15:44

    • Link copied

(Getty Image) (Getty Image)

The Seoul education office concluded Sunday that mandatory religious activities at general high schools, such as class worship services and choir competitions, could infringe on students' religious freedom.

This conclusion follows an investigation prompted by a student complaint at a private high school in Seoul, alleging that such compulsory extracurricular activities related to religion violated their rights under the city's Student Rights Ordinance. The complaint, submitted by a student, argued that the school's enforcement of religious events outside the standard curriculum conflicted with the freedom of religion and freedom of activities guaranteed by the ordinance.

The Seoul Metropolitan Office of Education's investigation revealed that, as part of its 2024 Education Plan, the school held 22 religious services annually for the entire student body, while keeping the school's name confidential.

Additionally, other religion-related activities, such as a mandatory chanting contest and an optional Bible quiz, were also organized. Participation in these events was recorded as a behavioral characteristic in students' records, potentially benefiting their university applications.

Another worship activity that was not part of the school calendar was an activity in which each class used its assembly time to sing and pray. The student rights center noted that neither the singing contest nor the class assembly praying was prearranged or optional for students.

Under Article 16 of the Seoul Student Rights Ordinance, schools are prohibited from requiring students to take part in religious courses or activities. The ordinance, implemented in 2012, was designed to protect students from discrimination based on factors such as religion, gender, disability and sexual orientation.

The school, founded as a Christian mission institution, defended its actions, stating that its religious focus was made clear to students prior to admission.

"It would be difficult to manage group activities if students were allowed to opt out individually. Students who feel uncomfortable with religious activities can choose to study in the library instead," the school administration responded.

However, the education office disputed the school’s claims, pointing out that student assignments to schools are typically made by the superintendent based on factors like residence and religious preference.

"While religion may be a consideration, it is not a priority, and students are generally assigned to schools without having actively chosen them," the office stated, noting that the school in question is classified as a general high school, rather than a specialized religious institution.

In Korea, general high schools are classified as national, established and managed by the state; public, established and managed by local governments; and private, established and managed by private school corporations. Besides specialized high schools for vocational purposes and schools with special focus on math, science and language, students are randomly allocated to schools mostly based on their residence's proximity to a school.

The education office has since recommended that the school provides students with a genuine choice regarding participation in religious activities and refrains from making such events mandatory. It also called for the school to educate both students and staff about their rights under the Seoul Student Rights Ordinance.

Furthermore, the Seoul Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction has been asked to assess the status of schools that organize religious courses or activities, including the school in question, and to strengthen oversight ensuring students’ religious freedom is respected.

While the Student Human Rights Education Center can issue recommendations following human rights violation complaints, such recommendations are not legally enforceable.