South Korea contained an initially explosive outbreak. The government's response was not without criticism, however, much of it centred on the issue of privacy.
South Korea has managed better than most countries to contain the spread of the new coronavirus. Of the 10,991 total cases recorded in the country, 65 per cent emerged in the city of Daegu, 240 kilometres south-east of the capital Seoul, which itself recorded just over 700 cases. 260 people have died from Covid-19, while 9,762 people have recovered. Although the virus spread to every province, most areas (with the exception of Daegu) avoided a medical emergency and full lockdown. South Korea responded swiftly and effectively to the sudden surge in infections that began with "patient 31", carrying out tens of thousands of tests per day; after the peak of more than 7,300 active cases on 11 March, the number began to fall.
The first confirmed case of Covid-19 on 20 January raised the alert level from blue to yellow (the national crisis management scale has four alert levels, with blue and yellow being the first two). On 18 February, the harbinger of an enormous rise in case numbers was diagnosed: the thirty-first patient. Within five days the number had reached 602 cases and the alert level was raised to red, the highest, urging people to avoid all non-essential movement. On the same day, residents of Daegu, the epicentre of the outbreak, were asked to isolate for two weeks. Many restaurants, private schools and shops chose to close voluntarily.
The measures adopted in South Korea were characterised by strong effectiveness and transparency, demonstrating an alternative to the lockdowns imposed in other countries. President Moon Jae-in's government did everything it could to minimise the economic repercussions by avoiding a complete movement ban (for example, by allowing people to go to work). In the third week of March, in a televised address, Prime Minister Chung Sye-kyun strongly urged "religious venues, indoor sports facilities and leisure venues such as nightclubs" to suspend all activities. "In the event of non-compliance with the administrative order, we will resort to every possible measure permitted by law, from closing venues to seeking compensation."
It is impossible to discuss the outbreak in South Korea without mentioning the notorious case of the Shincheonji church. Approximately half of the country's infections can be traced directly to, or indirectly linked to, what many consider a sect. The thirty-first patient diagnosed is thought to be behind the surge in cases: an active church member, she had a high fever from 7 February yet attended several services, some with more than a thousand participants.
Followers of the Shincheonji church are asked to keep their membership secret. In an interview, a former member revealed that during services everyone sits close together and is asked to remove their masks and glasses and shout "amen" many times — a practice that makes the ceremony a perfect breeding ground, a recipe for disaster. The group was widely criticised for providing the government with an incorrect and incomplete list of members, undermining the efficient and rapid tracing of patient 31's movements. As a result, the church leader publicly apologised and bowed to the nation on live television; he is now, as reported in a translation by NBC, under investigation for "murder, injury, and violation of infectious disease prevention and management."
Fast and effective testing was fundamental to containing the outbreak. On 7 February the swab-analysis capacity stood at three thousand per day; this figure rose to 15,000 within a month. There are now 118 different testing sites scattered across the country, ensuring easy access for the vast majority of the population. Most tests are carried out through a fast and safe drive-through system: the process takes ten minutes and results are communicated by text message the following day. According to an article in the Korea Herald, the tests are "more convenient, faster and safer for both patients and medical staff" because they minimise the risk of contagion. The well-coordinated system undoubtedly played a very important role in containing what was initially exponential spread.
The second feature of South Korea's response was complete and transparent communication of information concerning infected patients. Local government websites, apps and interactive online maps made available to everyone the data on the movements that infected citizens had made before being diagnosed. Residents are notified by text message whenever new cases are recorded in their area, followed by a detailed list of the infected person's movements, including specific shops and restaurants, which are temporarily closed and disinfected. In this way people can find out whether they may have been exposed to the virus, and know whether they need to isolate and get tested. Building such a system was made possible by the government's rapid access to credit card and phone data and to CCTV footage.
In addition, most Korean speakers have access to Naver, a search engine where official communications and articles can be found. The Ministry of Health website publishes daily press releases with the latest updates, news and statistics in both Korean and English. These sources of information are considered largely reliable, as are the most popular media outlets.
The data appear to show that the measures adopted have been successful in containing the virus: after the initial surge, the number of new cases began to fall slowly in mid-March, with fewer cases recorded each day. So much so that the government moved to ease containment measures in early May. In Seoul, however, a likely new cluster emerged, believed to be linked to the nightlife scene in Itaewon, the city's entertainment district, which prompted the government to reverse course and tighten measures once again to prevent a new wave of cases.
The pandemic radically changed life in South Korea for several weeks, and even though people are now slowly returning to normality, a sense of alertness remains. Almost everyone is wearing masks and some supermarkets make their use compulsory. Many shops and public facilities offer hand sanitiser. Many shopping centres use thermal cameras to measure customers' body temperature. Meanwhile, public schools and universities, unable to set a date for returning to class, are conducting lessons online.
In light of the decline in daily new cases, the Ministry of Health and Welfare launched the Enhanced Social Distancing Campaign to encourage citizens to "stay home as much as possible", which includes several precautionary measures. Visitors entering the country are also required to "go to an isolation facility designated by the Korean government at their own expense", while residents must quarantine in their own homes for two weeks.
The general opinion of the government's response is positive, but some people also credit the success to the efforts of medical staff and the discipline shown by citizens. When the outbreak was at its peak, the government was harshly criticised for not blocking transport links with China. Nearly 1,500,000 people signed an online petition calling for the indictment of President Moon Jae-in for this reason, claiming that "he seems like the president of China, not Korea". The accusations also stem from the fact that South Korea donated medical supplies to China, and it is argued that the outbreak could have been avoided or minimised had strict movement bans been imposed.
Despite the criticism, the ruling party secured a landslide victory in the parliamentary elections on 15 April, demonstrating the enormous support of the electorate for the government and for the way the crisis was handled; voter turnout was also two thirds of the electorate, the highest participation in nearly twenty years. The government won 180 seats out of 300 in the National Assembly, split between the ruling Democratic Party (163 seats) and its affiliated party with 17 seats. In order to vote, citizens wore gloves and masks, used hand sanitiser, kept a minimum distance of one metre from one another, and had their body temperature measured. Anyone with a temperature above 37.5°C voted in separate polling booths, which were disinfected after use. A system was also organised to allow people who had tested positive for coronavirus and those in quarantine to cast their votes.
In general, despite the containment of the virus's spread, the country remains on alert, fearing a possible second wave. Now that the outbreak has been brought under control, for many people it seems that the fear of being associated with the virus is greater than the fear of being infected. When a shop appears on the itinerary list of an infected person, it instantly becomes off-limits for locals. Owners of after-school tutoring centres fear that even a single case among their staff could cause them to lose customers. For these reasons, small businesses are constantly at risk of losing clients and being left without work.
The lack of privacy is a growing concern. The online publication of personal information in the finest detail has led to some embarrassing situations, including the unmasking of extramarital affairs, as in the case of a fifty-year-old who returned from China's Hubei province with his thirty-year-old secretary, but it is also a violation of basic human rights. The National Human Rights Commission released a statement expressing its concern about the excessive publication of private information belonging to infected patients. Even if one has nothing to hide, there is something deeply unsettling about seeing the details of one's movements published online for anyone to see. One cannot help but wonder whether the loss of privacy is a fair price to pay for the safety of the entire nation, with thousands of human lives potentially at risk.
Translated by Elettra Tsikoudis
