Forbidden Book Haunts Truth Commission

The president of Korea's truth commission is facing a lawsuit due to his controversial decision to stop the distribution of an English-language book that summarizes a dark chapter in the country's modern history.

The cover of the banned book.

By Lee Tae-hoon
Staff Reporter

The president of Korea's truth commission is facing a lawsuit due to his controversial decision to stop the distribution of an English-language book that summarizes a dark chapter in the country's modern history.

Translators and Mike Hurt, the final copyeditor of the book, told The Korea Times that they will file the suit on April 25 against Lee Young-jo, head of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC), for defamation with the help of a lawmaker who used to work for the TRC.

Lee stopped the distribution of "Truth and Reconciliation: Activities of the Past Three Years" due to alleged translation errors, but the people who worked on the book disagree, saying their honor has been violated by an apparent act of political censorship.

Upon his inauguration as the commission's new president last December, Lee ordered the halt of production of the "poorly translated" report published under the former chief commissioner, Ahn Byung-ook, who is perceived as a liberal.

Lee flatly denies the growing allegations that this was politically motivated or due to ideological reasons, but questions linger as his explanations appear to be self-contradictory.

Observers say the upcoming legal case will exemplify the challenges that the nation faces not only in acknowledging the truth, but also in reconciliation between those who have different views.

Uncomfortable Truth

Lee claims that the book was put together in a hurry ahead of the former TRC president's visit to Latin America in 2008, and its poor English translation has always been an issue from the date of publication.

However, commission officials told the paper that this was untrue as the book was published in March 2009 when Lee was serving as a standing committee member of the commission. They claimed that Lee not only called for a postponement of the book, but attempted to prevent its publication on ideological grounds.

"When Lee was a commissioner, he signed the official document to approve publication of this book. He did make verbal complaints about the English, and so I asked him to give me specific instructions regarding any corrections," a translator said.

"However, he never pointed out any specific examples of incorrect English, though he had three months to do so."

He suspects the translators and editors have become the victims of an ideological conflict, saying Lee told him in October 2008 that he disagreed with the view of the then-TRC's head, Ahn.

"I replied that it was fair enough to have a different view, but that, as I was just a translator, he should make his objections to Ahn directly," he said.

"However, Lee never said anything about this to him. Then, as soon as Lee became head of the commission, he banned the book."

Michael Breen, a former correspondent for the Washington Times and chairman of Insight Communications, also concurs with the translator, saying, "If Lee has a problem with the English only, he could have had it re-edited by now."

Erroneous Denials

Lee denies the claim that the ban was an attempt to conceal the former liberal government's efforts to uncover disturbing facts.

The latest newsletter of the TRC also states that the ban is not because of a problem with factual errors or ideological conflicts, but due to its substandard English, which "affects the reputation and credibility of the state-run body."

"Throughout the book, very basic grammatical mistakes, such as subject-verb and tense disagreements, singular/plural errors, and wrong article use, as well as syntax errors have been found along with awkward expressions and constructions," the March-April issue read.

It also points out that the Sydney Morning Herald's article, "Truth in Danger in South Korea," was misleading, saying the TRC's 215-page publication was a booklet, not a report.

When asked on what grounds the commission concluded that the book should be withdrawn from circulation, Lee Ok-nam, director of public relations at the TRC, answered that it was on the basis of an evaluation done early this year by a native English speaker copyeditor.

However, Benjamin Applegate, deputy editor at the JoongAng Daily, who took the job, told the paper that he did not make such an assessment for the commission, though he made a summary of the errors he found in the book.

"My work was intended to be used to help correct those errors, and that is the only purpose I had in writing it," Applegate said. "I was not asked to evaluate whether I believed the book was good enough to be published or not."

Unfair Scrutiny

Hurt, an editor of the book, worries that if the quality of the English in the publication is considered unacceptable, the government will use this excuse to hinder freedom of speech and screen out unpleasant information.

He also believes that, should the "sudden dedication" to the quality of English be applied to the rest of government documents and Web sites, some 80 percent of them would have to be pulled immediately.

One may say most of the documents that Lee, the Harvard-educated president of the TRC, has produced for the commission in English should also be banned, if such a high standard is to be applied.

When the paper analyzed a document, "Democratization and Transitional Justice in South Korea," that he had produced for a lecture in London in March last year, it appeared that he had difficulty in differentiating uncountable nouns with countable ones as seen from "criticisms," or "voted truths."

When asked what measures he would take to improve the quality of the commission's English-language reports, Lee said he would consider outsourcing the work abroad for cheaper but better quality translations.

In contrast, TRC officials acknowledge that the quality of the translation of the disputed book is considerably higher than other government publications, given that it was proofread numerous times by three native English speakers, including Hurt.

Their pay was also nearly three times higher than the standard rates set for government document translation to ensure its quality.

"I'm not involved in the politics, nor do I want to be, but I will say that the documents I helped proofread was one of the best translations I've ever gotten," Hurt said.

"As a professional proofreader and sometimes translator for the Korean National Commission for UNESCO for five years, this was one of the best written and fluidly expressed documents I have ever come across in English."

He said that there were very few major mistakes to correct, and that the amount of corrections required was no higher than that of proofreading academic work written by a native speaker of English.

"I can't comment too much on the translation aspect of this job, however, claiming that the English was incorrect, or poorly written, is simply not true. The final document that I saw was a professional piece of well-written and academic English."

Another proof reader of the book, who also has more than five years of experience in editing and proofreading, is on the same page with Hurt.

"As a proofreader, I think the English proofreading and editing is accurate. I reread each article or piece three-four times," he said.

"In total, this book was probably proofread nearly 10 to 12 times before it was finally released."

Failed Reconciliation

Some suspect that the translators and editors have become scapegoats for the political aims of Lee. He has told the paper that he gained the "passport" to become the minister-level commissioner for being mistaken as a member of the conservative New Right Group.

Lee, who claims to be a middle-of-the-road scholar, said that there will be no reconciliation with the ones who have accused him of censorship.

However, the TRC head said he may consider distributing the remaining 800 copies of the book by the commission, or posting it online with an additional statement that offers an apology for the incorrect English.

Meanwhile, Breen, author of the book "The Koreans," points out that while the English could be polished, the problem with the book is the content not the style. He had no doubt that the new president wants to rewrite the book because of its leftist and nationalist bias.

"Any document which is making very serious allegations needs to strip out emotion, avoid labeling people, and maintain a strict adherence to verifiable facts," Breen said.

He said the authors of the report are very aware of this accusation but don't seem to have made much effort to avoid it, as can be seen from the first chapter.

"When it says '... revisiting and clarifying historical events surrounding colonialism, Fascism, and massacres, which constituted the darker side of 20th century history,' my first thought was, he missed out communism," Breen said.

He also pointed out the problem with nationalism, saying it places greater importance on independence than on democracy and the rule of law, while ignoring the reality that it makes no difference to the oppressed if your oppressor is native or foreign.

"It says, 'Throughout the 20th century, Korea's history was marked by oppressive governments and hardships beginning with Japan's invasion and subsequent colonization of the country in 1910,' suggesting that Korea was fine before the Japanese arrived, when it wasn't."

Andrew Salmon, a correspondent for The Times, pointed out that 21st century Korea is still an ideological battle ground, saying, "The question facing the commission is whether it can staff itself with professionals whose personal ideologies do not affect their work."

Nevertheless, Salmon underlined that the publication ban should be lifted.

"Personally I believe the work of the truth commission should continue. Uncomfortable as it may be, the truth should be out."

An Excerpt From the Banned Report
(Chapter 1, Unedited)

I. Historical Background of Korea's Past Settlement

The issue of revisiting and clarifying historical events surrounding colonialism, Fascism, and massacres, which constituted the darker side of 20th century history, is being controversially discussed around the world.

With such international attention focused on the ongoing settlement of the past, Korea's own efforts extend beyond one nation and emphasize to the world the importance of settlement.

The experiences of Germany, South Africa, Spain, Argentina, and other countries provide guidance for Korea's past settlement activities. In turn, Korea will also provide lessons to other nations confronting similar issues. The country's history of suffering under war, imperialism, a series of dictatorships, and finally its successful democratization can be particularly notable in the progression of world history.

Throughout the 20th century, Korea's history was marked by oppressive governments and hadships beginning with Japan's invasion and subsequent colonization of the country in 1910. After its liberation in 1945, the Global Cold War created ideological confrontations that divided the Korean peninsula into the Sovietsupported North and the U.S.supported South. This eventually led to the Korean War and transformed the center of the peninsula into one of the most heavily militarized regions in the world. While an armistice exists, tensions continue to this day.

During the escalation, ideological confrontations prompted conflicts which resulted in executions to serve the political causes of each side. In South Korea, a civilian upheaval toppled Syngman Rhee's government in 1960.

The following year, Park Chung-Hee, a military general, staged a coup. Park's hard-line authoritarian rule was marked by notorious human rights abuses which lasted until an aide assassinated him in 1979. In May 1980, another group of politically-motivated military generals seized power by massacring civilians in Gwangju. In 1987, a civilian rebellion ushered in the democratization process by overturning the military government.

Considering the events that have occurred in Korea's modern history, an accumulation of abuses and tragedies has left number of tarnished legacies.

Without ever being fully dealt with, those who collaborated with the Japanese colonialists and with the subsequent dictatorial regimes, and acted as executioners for colonialism and dictatorships, as well as the systems and methods they operated under, remained impediments to Korea's democracy. Thus, in order to prevent these past wrong-doings from adversely affecting current Korean society, "the settlement of past incidents" attempts to examine and correct past misconduct.

The issues of past settlement are separated into three categories: Bringing to justice pro-Japanese supporters during the colonial era, revealing the truth behind massacres during the Korean War (including before and after the conflict) in order to restore honor to the victims, and verifying the facts of massacres and human rights abuses during Korea's democratization period so as to bring historical justice and truth.

While these are three separate classifications, they share the common thread of dealing with repressive structures that ruled Korean society.