The Judicial Reform Committee is about to announce its detailed proposal for a legal system that centers on the trial process. Prosecutors cannot use the contents of examination records when the accused denies their validity. The prosecution will be required to disclose investigation records to the defense ahead of a trial, and investigators will not be allowed to question the defense in court. These are things that were discussed in general at the public hearing held the 15th, but now that the final version is being discussed in the press the prosecution is coming out strongly opposed to the proposal.
The committee's point of departure was to correct the problems long noted about criminal law. The idea about not recognizing interrogation records as evidence in court is to assure that confessions obtained through coercion are not admitted. That issue was already brought to a conclusion with a decision from the Supreme Court. The committee wants to assure the disclosure of evidence to the accused so as to better guarantee the right to a defense. The reason it wants to keep investigators from being able to question defendants once trials have started is too keep them from scaring them and making them look guilty. There are concerns being expressed that without other stipulations put in place the prosecution will have no room to work with.
The judicial system has placed too much emphasis on "efficiency and speed" while neglecting the need to "discover the truth through fair and strict procedures," and the goal of the committee's proposal is to find balance between those two values. It will mean a lot more work for prosecutors trying to prove crimes, and it will mean far higher costs for the country as a whole. Since fewer innocent people will be punished, there might be more guilty individuals escaping responsibility because their crimes are hard to prove. The situation is one in which the country needs to choose how to harmonize the two goals.
The prosecution is already quite enraged over the proposal. Special Public Prosecutor General Kim Jong Bin is strongly opposed to it, and it looks like there will be another prosecution meeting on the matter. Actually, this, the re-adjustment of the investigative authority of the police and the prosecution, and the proposal about building a separate investigative organization for looking at corruption among public officials would all very likely reduce the prosecution's authority. That being the situation, prosecutors might indeed be displeased with the committee's proposal for strengthening the position of the courts. They might feel it is unfair when the prosecution was working on its own reform ideas. Shifts of power between state institutions are inevitable results of reform, however. The important question is whether the reform is appropriate. Instead of interpreting judicial reform politically, the prosecution should think of the issues from the people's perspective, then work to persuade the country about things it feels should be done differently.
The Hankyoreh, 29 April 2005.
[Translations by Seoul Selection (PMS)]
[Editorial] Put the People First in Judicial Reform |
