Why Were 886 Children Behind Bars, Not Under Protection?

"When is Mom coming back?"

Inside the Gyeonggi Foreigners' Protection Center, a social worker, unable to find words, could not answer a 3-year-old child's question. The child, who had never been outside and stared blankly at the wall, had been in 'detention' for 141 days. A child who was not a criminal and had not absconded was confined in that small space.

According to data released by the Ministry of Justice, 886 foreign children under the age of 19 were held in protection centers over the past five and a half years. Some were detained for months, others for years. One 18-year-old youth could not leave the center for 631 days. Although detention was under the guise of 'protection,' the reality was no different from a prison.

"We don't pay taxes to lock up children," said Lee Jung-hyun, an activist from a human rights organization, swallowing tears.

A System Called 'Protection', and its Blind Spots

Foreigner protection centers are facilities that temporarily hold individuals subject to forcible expulsion under the Immigration Act. However, it has been pointed out that the system of accommodating not only criminals but also children who are merely in violation of their stay with guardians, without exception, is fundamentally problematic.

The protection centers lack adequate educational facilities and medical infrastructure. The situation where infants under 3 years old and teenagers stay for several months to many years can have serious impacts on a child's psychological and emotional development. According to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, it is explicitly stated that "no child shall be deprived of his or her liberty arbitrarily or unlawfully."

Rep. Han Chang-min strongly criticized, "The prolonged detention of migrant children is a measure that violates international human rights standards, and the state can no longer tolerate it."

Repeated Warnings, Silent Policies

The civic group 'Coalition for the Rights of Migrant Children' has investigated over 30 similar cases in the past two years. As a result, numerous cases have been reported where children experienced mental distress, speech delays, and social withdrawal while being held in protection centers.
Lawyer Jeong Young-hwa pointed out, "This is not a systemic problem but clear state violence," adding, "Structural intervention is urgently needed, especially since detention periods often extend based on parental stay review procedures."

The Immigration Act does not limit the maximum period of protection, and the criteria for determining the detention of children and guardians are unclear. This creates a system that relies excessively on the discretion of administrative agencies, leaving a void in the state's responsibility to protect children's rights.

Voices Demanding Alternatives

Experts are urgently demanding the following systemic improvements:

1. Full prohibition of child detention and clear specification of exceptions

2. Establishment of a consultation-centered stay review process

3. Creation of a temporary foster care linkage system

4. Expansion of dedicated childcare facilities within protection centers

5. Introduction of human rights education and monitoring systems in line with UN standards

Rep. Han Chang-min is currently preparing a revision to the Immigration Act, which includes a provision for "prohibition of child detention," and civic groups warn that "the government must extend its hand before it is too late."

"What did these children do wrong?"

The children did not choose. They are not responsible for their parents' country of origin, their visa status, or inter-state agreements. Yet, now, children are growing up confined within the systems of adults.

What are we protecting by detaining them?
And, what are we losing in return?