The Judicial Reform Commission has decided on a bill for reforming the military justice system, one that includes making the military prosecution and military courts independent. Much about the bill proposal corrects and reforms wrongs from the past, but there are more than a few areas where you wish it had done more.
It is an important bit of progress to have the proposal seek to strengthen the independence of the military prosecution. The authority of commanders in issuing warrants, approving actions, and reducing sentences has long been problematic and so the commission is right to want to have that authority done away with. It is only natural that such a dated system be abolished, if you think of how there have been so many instances where the application of the law within the military has been distorted because of wrongful interference or pressure from commanders.
One is very skeptical about whether the proposal really seeks profound change, especially when you remember that ultimately the goal of reforming the military justice system lies in protecting soldiers' civil rights. For example, you doubt whether a military court needs to have jurisdiction over soldiers when they engage in ordinary crimes while on leave, crimes such as theft, robbery, or assault, simply because they are soldiers. Maybe that would be necessary in time of war or under martial law, but the commission would have been doing the right thing to have solders' referred to regular civilian courts for non-military crimes and sent to military courts for purely military crimes.
The commission's proposal has two sides to it, since it seeks to reduce the authority of the Defense Security Command (Gimusa) and the military police while increasing the authority of military prosecutors. Reducing the authority of those organizations is inevitable, particularly when you consider how a lack of cooperation in investigations and cover-ups have led to problems in the past. It is unfortunate, however, to not have done more to put minimum systems of checks and balances in place. The over-concentration of authority with the military prosecution does not automatically guarantee impartial and strict investigations. The regular prosecution is watched by the media but the military prosecution is not. It is an unchanging truth that power not kept in check easily becomes arrogant.
The Hankyoreh, 21 July 2005.
[Translations by Seoul Selection (PMS)]
[Editorial] Insufficient Reform in Military Justice |
