Gaza Relief Activist Loses Lawsuit to Overturn Passport Invalidation

Court Rules Passport Return Order Is a Measure to Protect Citizens
Activist Haecho Protests Verdict, Announces Plan to Appeal

Activist Ahyeon Kim (who uses the activist name Haecho), who attempted to enter the Palestinian Gaza Strip—a region subject to a travel ban—by boarding a relief vessel, filed a lawsuit against the Ministry of Foreign Affairs seeking to overturn the passport invalidation measure, but lost the case.

According to Yonhap News on August 27th, the 12th Administrative Division of the Seoul Administrative Court (presiding judge: Kang Jaewon) ruled against Kim in the lawsuit for the cancellation of the passport return order imposed by the Minister of Foreign Affairs.

On June 25, in front of the Seoul Administrative Court in Seocho District, Seoul, activist Ahyeon Kim (known as Haecho) urged for the guarantee of freedom of movement during the first hearing press conference for the lawsuit seeking cancellation of passport invalidation. Photo by Yonhap News Agency

In October last year, Kim's vessel was seized by the Israeli military while heading to Gaza as part of a relief flotilla in violation of the travel ban, resulting in his imprisonment at a local detention facility before being released after two days. Kim later announced plans to once again join humanitarian relief efforts for Gaza in January. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs ordered Kim to return his passport, but before receiving formal notification, he departed the country again in March to join another voyage. When his passport was rendered invalid, he filed an administrative lawsuit. According to the Passport Act, the validity of a passport is automatically lost if a return order is not complied with. In May, Kim again boarded a relief vessel headed for Gaza from a third country, and after being detained by the Israeli military and subsequently released, he returned to Korea on the 22nd of the same month.

The court found that the passport return order issued by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs was a protective measure for Kim and could not be deemed an excessive restriction on his freedom of residence and movement. While Kim’s humanitarian convictions and consequent actions should be respected, the court noted that the state's duty to ensure the safety of its citizens in the face of terror or other dangerous situations must also be taken into account.

The court explained, "Considering the dangers Kim was exposed to and the public interest sought through the disposition, it was reasonable for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to conclude that no other protective measure was available besides ordering the passport return," adding, "It cannot be considered a violation of the proportionality principle due to excessive infringement on Kim’s freedom."

Immediately following the verdict, Kim held a press conference in front of the courthouse to announce plans to appeal and expressed his dissatisfaction, stating, "I cannot understand this. What exactly do the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the court, and the Korean government mean by 'safety'?" He continued, "I will not bow to the continued sanctions and violence imposed on activists by the Korean government. I will continue to sail and fight for the liberation of Palestine."

Kwon Youngguk, leader of the Justice Party, who attended the trial as an observer, criticized the decision, saying, "Israel's massacre in Palestine is an international issue and also contradicts the constitutional spirit of the Republic of Korea, which denounces wars of aggression. The most indefensible aspect of this decision is the claim that an individual’s conscientious action could undermine national security."

Previously, Kim also filed a constitutional complaint arguing that the provision of the Passport Act under which his passport was invalidated was unconstitutional, but the petition was dismissed during the Constitutional Court’s preliminary review in May.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.