Shocking Pretrial Detention of Faith Leader (95)

Mother Han (83) no longer oldest religious leader in inhuman long-term pretrial detention in South Korea as Shincheonji head (95) is placed in tiny cell

On 23^rd June 2026, the South Korean daily Segye Ilbo published an opinion column by religion reporter Jeong Seong-su (정성수) about a controversial legal development involving Lee Man-hee (이만희). South Korean prosecutors and police had requested an arrest warrant for Lee, the 95-year-old founder and leader of the Shincheonji Church of Jesus. The column does not argue that Lee is innocent. Instead, it asks a broader question: How should a democratic society use its power to investigate and detain very elderly religious leaders?

See also Mother Han Trial Set to Conclude on 10th July

See also “Church Closure” Risks in South Korea’s New Bill

See also Religion-State: The Danger of Policing Belief

See also Hunting “Heretics”: Justice Minister Quoting Bible

See also 2027 Verdict in 2nd Trial Involving Mother Han

See also Should Democracies Have “Recognized Religions”?

Shincheonji is one of the country’s most persecuted religious movements. It operates within a particularly sensitive social context in Korea. Given the scrutiny this minority faith often receives from the media, allegations of political connections or collusion frequently attract heightened public attention and debate. Many Koreans view new religious movements – not only Shincheonji – negatively, while members argue that they face discrimination because of their faith.

Against that backdrop, any criminal investigation involving such movements quickly becomes politically and emotionally charged. Jeong’s column is therefore less about the specific allegations against Lee and more about the principles that should govern the state’s use of coercive power.

The central argument: detention should be exceptional

Jeong begins from a point that many readers would consider uncontroversial: religious leaders are not above the law. If there is evidence of wrongdoing, they should be investigated and judged by the courts like anyone else. The author explicitly rejects the idea that religion provides immunity from legal accountability.

However, he then draws an important distinction that is central to many modern legal systems: being investigated is not the same as being detained before trial. In South Korea, as in many countries, pretrial detention is supposed to be an exceptional measure used mainly when there is a serious risk that a suspect will flee or destroy evidence. According to Jeong, public anger or the seriousness of an allegation alone should not automatically justify detention.

He worries that, in highly emotional cases involving unpopular religious groups, society may become too willing to treat detention as a form of punishment before a court has reached a verdict.

Why Lee Man-hee’s age matters

The most striking feature of the case, Jeong argues, is Lee’s age. Born in 1931, Lee was 95 years old at the time of the warrant request. Shincheonji stated that he had cooperated with investigators and posed no flight risk, though the author acknowledges that the court – not the religious organization – must decide whether that claim is credible.

Jeong’s point is not that old age should exempt someone from prosecution. Rather, he argues that extreme old age changes the practical and humanitarian considerations surrounding detention. A person in their mid-nineties may appear healthy one day and become seriously ill the next. Even a change in living environment can have major health consequences for the very elderly. Because of this, he suggests that judges should weigh not only legal factors but also the human impact of detention.

A broader concern about elderly religious leaders

To illustrate his concern, Jeong refers to another prominent Korean religious figure, 83-year-old Hak Ja Han (한학자) of the Family Federation for World Peace and Unification. During legal proceedings involving her organization, there were public discussions about her health, including reports that existing medical conditions worsened and that she experienced several falls while in detention.

Jeong uses this example to argue that legal responsibility and human dignity are not mutually exclusive. An elderly person can still be held accountable under the law, but the state should avoid unnecessary measures that create disproportionate physical or psychological harm.

The danger of emotional justice

One of the column‘s strongest themes is the distinction between legal judgment and social hostility. Jeong argues that when a religious group becomes widely persecuted, public emotions can begin to influence how people think about criminal procedure. In his view, this is dangerous because the rule of law requires consistent standards.

A minority religion should not face harsher treatment simply because it is controversial. Conversely, a socially respected religion should not receive special protection. The same legal criteria should apply to all groups, regardless of whether the public admires or distrusts them.

What the rule of law means

Jeong presents a relatively classical understanding of the rule of law. The true test of a democracy, he argues, is not how much power the state possesses, but how carefully it restrains itself when using that power. Governments may have the authority to investigate, arrest, and detain, but they should not automatically use every power available to them.

Because detention restricts a person’s physical liberty before a final conviction, it deserves especially careful scrutiny. Decisions about detention should be based on legal standards such as flight risk and evidence tampering, not on public outrage or symbolic politics.

Freedom of religion and state neutrality

The column also touches on the principle of separation between religion and the state. Jeong argues that this principle does not mean religious organizations are exempt from the law. If a religious group commits illegal acts, those acts should be prosecuted.

What the state must avoid, he says, is treating religion itself as a social evil or using religious leaders as symbolic targets to satisfy public anger. In other words, prosecute alleged crimes, but do not criminalize a faith community as such.

The conclusion

Jeong ends by emphasizing that he is not declaring Lee Man-hee or Hak Ja Han innocent. Questions of guilt or innocence belong to the courts. The Segye Ilbo religion correspondent’s concern is procedural and ethical: when the state exercises coercive power against very elderly religious leaders, it should do so with exceptional restraint, careful reasoning, and respect for human dignity.

For an international audience, the significance of the column lies in this broader debate. The article is not simply a defense of a persecuted religious movement. It is an argument about how democratic societies should balance public criticism of unpopular groups, equal application of the law, and humanitarian considerations for very elderly defendants. Whether readers ultimately agree with Jeong’s conclusions or not, the column raises a question that extends far beyond South Korea: How can a state remain firm in enforcing the law while also remaining restrained, impartial, and humane?

See also Mother Han Trial Set to Conclude on 10th July

See also 2027 Verdict in 2nd Trial Involving Mother Han

See also “Church Closure” Risks in South Korea’s New Bill

See also Religion-State: The Danger of Policing Belief

See also Hunting “Heretics”: Justice Minister Quoting Bible

See also Should Democracies Have “Recognized Religions”?

See also Statement Ahead of Final Hearing for Mother Han

See also New Law, New Standards for Religious Reporting

Text: Knut Holdhus, editor

Featured image above: Lee Man-hee (이만희), founder and chairman of Shincheonji (New Heaven and Earth). Photo: MBC PD수첩 / Wikimedia Commons. License: CC Attr 3.0 Unp

Related to pretrial detention of faith leader: Religion Between Engagement and Withdrawal

And also related to pretrial detention of faith leader: State Failure and Non-State Peace Projects

More, related to pretrial detention of faith leader: Korea: Can Religion and Politics Be Disentangled?

Also related to pretrial detention of faith leader: A 10-Minute Visit to Mother Han in Detention

Even more, related to pretrial detention of faith leader: Denying Allegations: Hak Ja Han (82) in Inquiry

Also related to pretrial detention of faith leader: SKorean Court’s Sharp Criticism of Prosecutors

And also related to pretrial detention of faith leader: Detention: Harsh Cell Conditions Spark Outcry

More, related to pretrial detention of faith leader: Ugly: Arrest Warrant Sought for Hak Ja Han (82)

And more, related to pretrial detention of faith leader: Critics Warn of “Authoritarian Drift” in SKorea

Even more, related to pretrial detention of faith leader: Court Decision to Prolong Detention Condemned

Still more, related to pretrial detention of faith leader: Co-Founder, 82, Questioned 9 Hours by Prosecutors

Also related to pretrial detention of faith leader: Democratic Party’s Assault on Family Federation

And even more, related to pretrial detention of faith leader: Mother Han (82) in Poor Health in Damp, Cold Cell

And still more, related to pretrial detention of faith leader: Korean Crisis: “True Democracy Must Serve Heaven”

And yet more, related to pretrial detention of faith leader: Faith Leaders Protest State Assault on Religion

And more, related to pretrial detention of faith leader: Trump Raises Alarm Over Church Raids in Korea

Even more, related to pretrial detention of faith leader: Mike Pompeo Calls Probe of Co-Founder “Lawfare”

Still more, related to pretrial detention of faith leader:  Korean Faith Crackdown: USA Urged to Confront It

Yet more, related to pretrial detention of faith leader: Korean Bribery Scandal: Media Clears Federation

And also related to pretrial detention of faith leader: Raids Blur Line Between Justice and Politics

More, related to pretrial detention of faith leader: Heavy-Handed Raid on Sacred Sites Condemned