Since the division of the Korean peninsula after World War Two, South Korea has offered safe haven to more than 30,000 of their brethren from the impoverished, authoritarian North. But when two North Korean men sought asylum after drifting across the maritime border in a small fishing boat this month, Seoul made the unprecedented decision to turn them away . South Korean authorities repatriated the men, both in their 20s, through a border village on Thursday after concluding they had murdered 16 of their crew along with a third accomplice in a botched mutiny against their captain. Although defectors are normally granted automatic citizenship and economic assistance in the South, officials said the men did not qualify for asylum under South Korean or international law because they had “committed serious non-political crimes” and posed a risk to South Korean society. As US troops leave Seoul, a peek inside Korea’s Yongsan military base The repatriations – which were arranged with Pyongyang just three days after the men were apprehended – have incensed defector and human rights organisations, who accuse the administration of President Moon Jae-in of denying the accused men due process and putting them at risk of torture and execution by the regime of third-generation dictator Kim Jong-un . The case has also reignited criticism that Moon, a human rights lawyer-turned-liberal politician, has pursued rapprochement with the North, including three one-on-one summits with the North Korean leader, at the cost of sidelining human rights concerns and opposition towards the regime. Under his administration, defectors and other activists have complained of being restricted from carrying out activism such as flying balloons carrying anti-regime leaflets across the border. “When two defectors come to Korea, they should be regarded as South Korean people and judged according to our law,” said Kim Jong-ha, a professor at Hannam University in Daejeon, South Korea. “Why were they expelled so quickly?” North and South Korea to hold military talks after disarmament pledge On Monday, a coalition of 17 rights groups in South Korea accused the government of denying the men due process and failing to provide “clear evidence” of their guilt, calling for a parliamentary inquiry into its handling of the case. Greg Scarlatoiu, executive director of the Washington-based Committee for Human Rights in North Korea, said there was “no doubt that the two deportees have been returned to a place where they face no due process, harsh punishment, torture, and almost-certain execution.” “The deportation of the two North Korean fishermen creates serious moral, ethical, and legal concerns that friends of Korea should call attention to,” Scarlatoiu said. Others have questioned the South Korean government’s account of the killings. In the Daily NK , a media outlet focused on the North, Choi Ju-hwal, a former official in the North Korean army, said it was “very hard to accept” that three men had been so easily able to kill 16 of their crewmates without a weapon such as a gun. “You could punish the men to the full extent under South Korean law,” said Jung Gwang-Il, a prison camp survivor who runs the non-profit organisation No Chain, questioning the need to return the accused men to the North. “Nobody can trust an investigation that has them repatriated after three days.” Jung said many defectors suspected the government had repatriated the men to placate Pyongyang while it was seeking to hold talks on the future of a resort at the North’s Mount Kumkang, once a rare example of cross-border tourism. “The North Korean regime believes all defectors including me are heinous criminals, so now it looks like we all could be repatriated for this purpose,” Jung said. South Korea’s Unification Ministry and the presidential Blue House did not respond to requests for comment. However, Shin Kwang-yeong, a professor of sociology at Chung-Ang University in Seoul, said there was little criticism of the move among the general public. “Criminals who committed homicide have been transferred to the country where prosecutors are seeking the criminals, regardless of the severity of punishment,” Shin said. “The case of the two Koreans is not an exception.” Lim Jae-cheon, a North Korean studies professor at Korea University in Sejong, said the repatriations marked a fundamental shift in Seoul’s policy toward North Koreans, who are all considered South Korean citizens under a ruling by the country’s Supreme Court. While South Korea has occasionally repatriated North Koreans at their request, it had previously never returned someone from the North after they had requested asylum. “Before this decision, the government had a principle of accepting all if they wanted to come to South Korea,” Lim said. Is North Korea’s new submarine ballistic missile a threat to US? “The South Korean government also seems to have obtained some information on the defectors from the North Korean government. It means the North Korean government influenced the South Korean government’s decision.” Lim said that while it was a divisive issue, with some South Koreans supporting the repatriations, the government had been hasty in making its decision. “It should have had more time to deliberate the issue and considered the danger that the defectors would be tortured and executed if they were repatriated to North Korea,” he said. “If the government was not ready to accept the defectors, it should have requested other countries to accept them before its final decision.”