On September 28, officials from the United Nations Command (UNC) discussed with reporters the implications of the 'DMZ Peaceful Use Law' currently being debated in the South Korean National Assembly. They emphasized that if the South Korean government were to permit civilian access to the DMZ without UNC's approval, it would constitute a violation of the Armistice Agreement. The UNC stated that the jurisdiction over the DMZ south of the Military Demarcation Line (MDL) resides with the UN Commander, a claim that they argued has remained unchanged for over 70 years.

The text of the Armistice Agreement, signed on July 27, 1953, lays out the essential management directions without detailing entry procedures or specifics about crossing the MDL. The practical management of the DMZ is implemented through UNC regulations, which specify that approval for access to the southern DMZ must come from the Deputy Secretary of the UNC Military Armistice Commission. Despite the UNC's recent announcement suggesting that a specific article of the Armistice provides control access jurisdiction to the DMZ, the word 'jurisdiction' is notably absent from the original agreement, which frequently mentions 'military control' instead.

The UNC's assertion that the jurisdiction over the DMZ has remained unchanged for 70 years is contested. After the signing of the Armistice, neither the Military Armistice Commission nor the UNC referenced jurisdiction over the DMZ until after a historic summit in 2000 that opened up parts of the DMZ for transportation and tourism initiatives. This marked a turning point where the terms 'jurisdiction' and 'administration' began to emerge in discussions regarding access and management, reflecting a shift in the long-standing approach to the DMZ.