[Editorial] No need to hasten NSL revision

With the ruling Millennium Democratic Party (MDP)'s decision to submit a revision of the National Security Law (NSL) to the special session of the National Assembly this month, inter-party bickering over the controversial law change has flared up again.

The ruling MDP is determined to pass the NSL revision during the forthcoming National Assembly session, but the opposition Grand National Party (GNP) and the splinter United Liberal Democrats (ULD), coalition partner of the MDP, maintain a hard-line position to oppose the legislation.

As we pointed out earlier, the NSL needs to be streamlined to adapt to the era of the inter-Korean peace and cooperation. In particular, the venomous provisions that frequently were abused for infringing upon human rights under the authoritarian military regimes ought to be properly rearranged, even though the particular stipulations are not now misapplied.

Yet the question of revising the politically sensitive security law cannot be handled merely from the legal dimension, as it involves national sentiments that are difficult to be addressed by the legislative step. Putting aside the debates over the concrete law provisions, the NSL long has been impressed upon the people with its symbolic meaning for safeguarding national security.

What's more, raising our concern is the fact that the ruling camp's drive to change the anti-communist law coincides with the forthcoming visit to Seoul by North Korean Defense Commission Chairman Kim Jong-Il. As the opposition party contends, suspicion has it that the governing party is driving to complete the law revision before the North Korean leader's Seoul visit. If this is true, it is least desirable.

For instance, in the case of Article 7 of NSL, regarding prohibiting the activities of praising and encouraging anti-state organizations, the particular stipulations were undeniably exploited to infringe upon human rights. But, providing that some younger activists hit the streets waving the North's national flags to welcome Kim's Seoul coming, while some others stage demonstrations against his visit here, the nation is feared to be embroiled in the vortex of shocks, confusions and complications.

Some people aired apprehension over the emergence of pro-North Korean organizations, which would put forward slogans similar to those of the North's ruling Workers (communist) Party. The revision of the security law should be not undertaken at the requests of North Korea. It is enough for us to amend the law out of our own necessity, in the belief that out structure is superior to the North's. Nonetheless, we have yet to reach a political, social and ideological consensus on the tricky question.

In this situation, if the government force changing the controversial law revision, it could entail a serious consequence that does harm rather than good to the nation with the potential spilt of national opinion in the South, stemming from ideological complications.

Kim Jong-Il's Seoul visit and the revision of the NSL should be regarded as a different matter. The ruling camp ought to realize that any coercive attempt to tie the two events is feared to trigger untoward consequence.