South Korea’s treatment of Mother Han in long-term detention today shows echoes of communist-era repression in East Europe
Dr. Juraj Lajda, an early member of the Unification Church in the former Czechoslovakia, writes for News and Insights from Prague November 2025,
Dr. Juraj Lajda, Photo (2024): Personal
“In 1973 the persecution of the Unification Church members started. The communist secret police started to observe us and in September 1973 the first members were arrested. Within several weeks almost 30 members were put into prison.Now, about 50 years later, something I never thought possible is taking place. In a democratic and free country, Mother Han, the Co-Founder of the Family Federation, has been detained for more than 60 days and goes through similar trials and difficulties that I myself and many others suffered under the anti-religious communists in what was then Czechoslovakia.
In communist prison for 3 years and 2 months: Juraj Lajda, here in the early 1970s. Photo: Personal
At that time 18 members were sentenced to terms ranging from one year to four years and four months. I myself was in prison for three years and two months.
We experienced a similar humiliation and persecution as True Mother does now. At first, they put us in custody. Every day, they interrogated us for 6-7 hours. This lasted for three months until the case was closed, and the file was submitted to the judge. We were held in a 2×3 m cell, with two or three other prisoners.
In communist prison 4 years and 4 months, despite serious health condition: Alžbeta (Betka) Danišková, here in February 2024. Photo: FFWPU
Our national leader at the time, Betka Danišková, was taken into custody even though she had previously been in a very serious car accident. Her health condition was very serious, she had problems with her spine, could not move properly and her condition required medical care. Despite all this, she was taken into custody and interrogated. For a whole month, she refused to testify due to health problems, which the investigator had to accept, even though he constantly urged her to participate in the interrogation.
After a year of investigation, the final appeal court was held. The judge promised her a suspension of her sentence and time to recover. However, nothing of the sort happened. Finally, she spent 4 years and 4 months in prison.
As members, we were aware of her health condition and knew that she needed medical care. During the trial, some members asked the judge, to her dismay, if they could serve the sentence imposed on Betka themselves so that she could be released.
But these are the ways of communist and totalitarian regimes. No respect for human life.
In 1948, the communists came to power in the former Czechoslovakia. The first thing they did was to persecute and liquidate believers and religious people, political opponents, and any opponents whatsoever.
Our lawyers were surprised why we were being held in custody. During the investigation, they realized that we would not escape punishment. It was only a matter of the severity of the punishment.
The entire trial was staged with the clear intention of destroying our group. That was the assignment, and the prosecutors and judges proceeded accordingly.
After the fall of communism, all charges were dropped, and we were recognized innocent.”
Detained long-term in South Korea: Pastor Son Hyun-bo, here Aug. 2025. Photo: Bitter Winter
Reading Dr. Juraj Lajda’s account of the 1970s – long interrogations, custody despite serious illness, predetermined verdicts, and a judicial process used to “destroy” a religious group – one is struck by how specific techniques of repression recur across time and regimes. Comparing that account to the recent, widely discussed situation involving prolonged interrogation of Hak Ja Han and other religious figures in South Korea highlights several worrying similarities, even as important differences between a communist police state and a modern constitutional democracy should be kept in view.
First, the tactic of long, exhausting interrogation as a means of pressure appears in both narratives. Lajda reports daily sessions of six to seven hours for months – an approach aimed at breaking down resistance, gathering statements that can be shaped into charges, and signaling the state’s dominance. Recent reports describe unreasonable long hours of questioning by special prosecutors in South Korea. Regardless of legal framework or labels attached to the investigating body, prolonged interrogation wears on the human body and mind and can create the conditions for coerced or unreliable statements. The method’s psychological effect – humiliation, exhaustion, isolation – is itself a tool that, in both accounts, serves to intimidate not only individuals but an entire community.
Alžbeta (Betka) Danišková. Photo (2023): Erna Mae Leskovjansky
Second, both accounts feature the targeting of vulnerable or medically fragile individuals. Lajda emphasizes Betka Danišková’s fragile health – a prior car accident, spinal problems, inability to move easily – and how those vulnerabilities were ignored or overridden by the authorities, resulting in a lengthy prison term despite promises to the contrary.
The parallel with Mother Han’s repeated movement in a wheelchair after surgeries brings the same ethical question into relief: how does a justice system respond when those it prosecutes are in poor health? In the Czechoslovak account, medical need was subordinated to the objective of punishment. If similar disregard is present in South Korea – through prolonged detention or repeated, strenuous procedures imposed on someone with known health limitations – the similarity is not in legal form but in human cost.
Third, the specter of preordained verdicts and instrumentalized trials forming part of a broader political assignment binds the two stories. Lajda recalls that their lawyers realized early on that the outcome was foreordained: “it was only a matter of the severity of the punishment.” The trial was “staged with the clear intention of destroying our group.” In contemporary contexts, citizens often interpret aggressive investigation and sustained public prosecutors’ activity against prominent figures as politically animated if there is a perception that prosecutorial zeal is selective. Even in democracies, when prosecutorial processes appear directed toward a preconceived outcome – particularly when cases involve public figures or religious leaders – perceptions of instrumentalized justice can arise and erode public trust.
Died in communist prison under mysterious circumstances: Marie Živná. Photo (1973): From the archive of FFWPU Slovakia.
Fourth, both situations involve the use of legal institutions to regulate or punish religion and religious actors. Under communism, repression of religious groups was explicit state policy; in Lajda’s telling, the first acts of the new regime were to “persecute and liquidate believers.”
In a democratic setting the legal basis for action against religious actors is more likely to be framed as rule-of-law enforcement – tax, fraud, or other statutory violations. But the function can appear similar when enforcement disproportionately targets a religious movement or its leadership and when the legal process is experienced by adherents as persecution. The distinction between legitimate law enforcement and persecution can blur when procedures are opaque, when outcomes seem prearranged, and when the rhetoric surrounding investigations is charged.
In sum, Dr. Lajda’s testimony and the contemporary allegations share troubling motifs: prolonged interrogation as a pressure tactic, apparent disregard for the health and vulnerability of detainees, and the experience that courts and prosecutions can function as instruments of group suppression.
Those parallels are meaningful because they highlight how procedural details – hours of questioning, detention decisions, medical accommodations, and the transparency of legal process – shape whether justice feels impartial or punitive. At the same time, important structural differences remain between a one-party authoritarian state and a democratic society; preserving those democratic safeguards requires a vigilant civil society, independent courts, and institutions willing to investigate alleged abuses of prosecutorial power.
Testimony by Dr. Juraj Lajda, additional text by Knut Holdhus, editor
Featured image above: Left: Some of the members who were imprisoned in Czechoslovakia during crackdown by Communist authorities in 1973-1974. In the middle, are the prison photos of Marie Živná, who died while in prison. Photo: Screenshot from “The Struggle for Truth and Justice” Right: Artistic impression of Mother Han in detention cell. Illustration: Grok xAI, 4th November 2025.
Dr. Juraj Lajda, Photo (2024): Personal
In communist prison for 3 years and 2 months: Juraj Lajda, here in the early 1970s. Photo: Personal
In communist prison 4 years and 4 months, despite serious health condition: Alžbeta (Betka) Danišková, here in February 2024. Photo: FFWPU
