[Editorial] Clearing up a dark period in Korea’s judiciary

The Korean court system considers the period between early 1974 until late 1979 to be its dark ages. The single biggest "judicial murder" committed during that period were cases involving Park Chung-hee’s so-called "Emergency Measures," and it was none other than these cases that the Supreme Court said would be dealt with first when it decided last year to look that shameful part of its history in the face. The idea was that the people’s rights had been more widely and lethally trampled on by those judgements than by either the National Security Law (NSL) or the Anti-Communist Law. In the international community, those cases earned Korea a place on the list of barbaric nations.

The country’s truth and reconciliation commission says it has finished a survey of 589 "emergency measures" violations and 1,412 subsequent judgments. The backwards nature of these cases is well known, but this is significant in that it is the first time a government institution has examined and evaluated them. This will sound an alarm for the state power apparatus and the judicial branch, because the study shows you how seriously the power apparatus can abuse human rights, and how the judicial branch is helpless when pushed around by it.

The right to invoke "emergency measures" was the authority, held by the president at the time, to suspend all citizens’ rights and freedoms and was beyond approach of the judiciary. It began with Emergency Measure No. 1, which sought to put a stop to the debate about getting rid of the Yusin Constitution, continued through Emergency Measure No. 4, which involved the prosecuting of persons implicated in the National Young Students’ Alliance For Democracy (Min Cheong Hak Nyeon) cases, and evolved to a whole new level in Emergency Measure No. 9. That one stipulated that to prevent the overthrow of the state, spreading rumors, discussing the constitution, holding demonstrations, and other political expression would be punished. It even prohibited criticism of the measure itself, so there wasn’t a whole lot else to say. The judicial branch became little more than a lady in waiting to these measures. Its judgments might be characterized as "speedy" and having "set" prices. The sentences it issued were identical to what the prosecution would ask for, and decisions were in no way different than indictments. Trials covered a lot of territory in very little time. The first "violators," famous dissidents Jang Jun-ha and Baek Gi-wan, were sentenced to 15 years in prison just six days after being indicted.

It was not only a nightmare for the victims themselves and the courts, but also for the whole country, since everyone had to live virtually gagged. Reportedly, last year the Supreme Court also considered drafting legislation annulling all these cases. That is something that really should be pursued, since there are agitators making mischief these days, agitators who feel nostalgia for the days of Yusin and don’t remember it as a nightmare. The Supreme Court says the idea is stalled because of a debate about constitutionality, but what is important is that there must never again be human rights abuses by the state. After all, following World War II, West Germany annulled all measures taken under Hitler’s Enabling Act.

Please direct questions or comments to [[e-mail]]