The Citizens’ Participation in Criminal Trials Act which was made to ensure the public’s involvement was recently finalized. However, there still remains a debate about it.

pro

In January, there was a trial about a stabbing in Yeouido last August. The jury gave a guilty verdict and unanimously decided to sentence the defendant to a heavy penalty. Therefore, the judge sentenced the defendant to 14 years’ imprisonment. As we can see from this trial, the jury participated in the trial and decided guilt and the sentence. The jury participated in the trial because of the Civil Participation in Criminal Trials Act. Because of this law, there are many benefits.

First, the public can get rid of distrust of the judiciary. Because the public vote for the president and members of the National Assembly, the public can exercise their rights. However, the judiciary is selected by the president and the National Assembly. According to the Hankyung newspaper, 77% of the public think that trials that the judiciary decides are unfair. However, because of the Civil Participation in Criminal Trials Act, the public participate in the trial and can exercise their rights over the judiciary.

Next, the verdict of the jury has a decisive effect on the judgment. Before the Civil Participation in Criminal Trials Act was enforced, the verdict of the jury didn’t influence the judge. However, now if three quarters of the jury agrees, the judge has to follow the verdict. The existing law was that the verdict of the jury was just a recommendation, but now the verdict has an effect on the sentence.

Lastly, a transparent and fair trial can be attained. Before this law was implemented, in trials related to politicians and chaebol, the sentences for most of the trials were weak. Therefore, the public expressed their dissatisfaction. However, now a jury can participate in trials related to politicians and chaebol. Therefore, the trials will be more fair and transparent than before.

Implementing a jury system will be clearly meaningful. There are many advantages such as the removal of distrust of the judiciary, having a decisive effect on the judgment, and a transparent and fair trial. Therefore, the Civil Participation in Criminal Trials Act has to be implemented.




con

The Citizens’ Participation in Criminal Trials Act is a new criminal justice system in which citizens participate as a juror in a criminal trial. The people in the jury discuss the appropriate punishment, and the judge decides on the punishment. Recently, various crimes, for example, murder, robbery, and rape, have increased. The Citizens’ Participation in Criminal Trials Act was implemented to ensure the participation of the public in the judicial system. However, there are several problems with this system.

First of all, jurors are not experts in the law. They are selected randomly from the juror list at each court. In this process, judges, prosecutors, and defense attorneys ask brief questions to the jury candidates to make sure that they qualify. However, the Citizens’ Participation in Criminal Trials Act deals with serious crimes. The capacity of jurors who participate in these cases cannot be determined by just a few questions.

Second, jurors may lack fairness in judgments because of local feelings or the gap between the rich and the poor. They can be also exposed to bribes and intimidation and can be moved by personal sympathy. The defendant’s side may attempt to cut down the sentence through appealing to emotions, not to reasonable evidence. For example, on November 19, 2012, Gang Seong-ik was put on trial for the murder of a 40-year-old woman on the Jeju olle. He tried to cut his sentence through saying, “I’m sorry for the bereaved. I want forgiveness,” and shedding a few tears to arouse sympathy in his final statement. As a result, most of the jurors chose a 23-year sentence which is close to the lowest for rape and murder.

Lastly, the Citizens’ Participation in Criminal Trials Act is costly. Jurors get 100,000 won per day and candidates get 50,000 won per day. In addition, defendants are given the right to appeal 3 times in the general judicial system. The Citizens’ Participation in Criminal Trials Act also has the potential for 3 appeals. If criminals appeal 3 times, then we have to select jurors and pay jurors again. Like this, the Citizens’ Participation in Criminal Trials Act still has many problems.

It is good that this system has been introduced to increase the democratic legitimacy of the judiciary and the confidence of the public. However, if these problems are not solved, the Citizens’ Participation in Criminal Trials Act should not be implemented. Therefore, I am opposed to this system.