The Constitutional Court declared unconstitutional in the opinion of six to three judges in the provisions of the Public Official Election Act, which stipulated the verification of the real name on the Internet bulletin board during the campaign.
In the afternoon of the 28th, if an internet media company posts information such as support or opposition to a political party or candidate on the bulletin board of the relevant website during an election campaign, technical measures are taken to confirm the real name, and no action is taken or information without a real name authentication mark is deleted. If not, all provisions of the Public Official Election Act (formerly Article 82, Paragraph 1 of the Public Official Election Act, etc.) were considered unconstitutional.
In 2012, the Constitutional Court decided it was unconstitutional for the regular Internet bulletin board identification system of the former Information and Communication Network Act in 2012, but in 2015 it only decided to be constitutional in the’election’ situation.
However, before the 2017 presidential election, Media Today temporarily closed the anonymous comment section and refused to confirm the real name of comments during the election. In March last year, through the corporate judicial corporation OpenNet, he filed a constitutional petition under the provisions of the Public Officials Election Act, which stipulates the Internet real-name system during the election.
Accordingly, the Constitution said, “If political anonymous expressions on bulletin boards on the Internet homepage are regulated, the general public refrains from expressing critically under self-censorship due to concerns of political retaliation, and even if such concerns are overcome and critical expressions anonymously The expression can be deleted just because it has not been confirmed,” he said. “It may hinder the formation of free public opinion that forms the basis of democracy.”
In addition, he said, “The negative effect of political anonymity during the election campaign puts priority on administrative convenience and crackdown convenience over freedom of expression, thus restricting the freedom of anonymous expression and the right to self-determination of personal information.”
The three judges who argued for the constitution said, “Users who want to post information on bulletin boards on the website of relatively high-profile internet media companies during the campaign period due to real-name verification measures, etc., are subject to post-hoc sanctions such as defamation or defamation of the candidate It could lead to refraining from actions that try to favorably shape public opinion by posting information that may be the subject of a political party, or distributing information that supports or opposes a specific party candidate in various ways.”
However, in accordance with the Constitutional Court’s ruling that the provisions of the Public Official Election Act are unconstitutional, the provisions of the real-name system will be abolished in the future election period.
Copyright © Media Today, unauthorized reproduction and redistribution are prohibited.