![]() |
The man identified as Lee with nine previous convictions has been wearing an electronic anklet or geo-positioning device since May last year after he was released, following a 12-year prison sentence, when the law was put into force retroactively. He had been banned from leaving his home for six hours from mid-night. However, Lee told his probation officer: “Nothing happened,” when the latter called five minutes after he was confirmed not to be at home until 00:05 a.m.
Lee was arrested on charges of attempted sexual assault after the victim reported the incident to police the next day.
A growing number of ex-convicts have been attempting to repeat sexual violence while wearing electronic anklets. As a result, it has been pointed out that the device has little effect on the prevention of the recurrence of sexual crimes.
There was no recurrence of sexual crime in 2009 -- and three in 2010 -- after sexual offenders were obligated to wear electronic anklets by law from 2008. However, the number jumped to 15 last year. As of April 30 this year, five offenders were caught attempting sexual crimes again.
The law stipulates that those who serve prison terms for sexual crimes on those aged below 13 years must wear the electronic anklets 24 hours a day.
The dwindling effect of electronic anklets is ascribed to the slower growth of those supervising the offenders although the number of offenders has increased rapidly
As of the end of March, the number of electronic anklet wearers stood at 941 people, 6.2 times the 151 in 2008, the first year of its introduction. However, the number of police checking geo-positioning and probation officers increased only 70 percent from 63 in 2009 to 104 this year.
In particular, there are only 76 probation officers who are actually active on the scene. They have to monitor a total of 14,049 cases involving electronic anklets annually.
“One probation officer had to handle 538 cases in Jeonju, North Jeolla Province, last year,” said an official of the Ministry of Justice. “Last November, one official committed suicide due to stress from the heavier burden, such as frequent calls to go to the scene during the night or on holidays in connection with the anklets; far beyond his regular duties.”