Will military change itself this time?

Defense Minister Han Min-koo speaks at a forum with military officers in charge of religious affairs about how to reform military culture, at a Ministry of National Defense convention on Sept. 12. / Yonhap

Judiciary reform, ombudsman expected to serve as litmus test

By Jun Ji-hye

The Ministry of National Defense is under increasing pressure from concerned citizens as well as human rights groups to reform the military in the wake of recent tragedies, including a 23 year-old serviceman who went on a shooting spree in June, killing colleagues, and the death of a soldier the same age, caused by injuries sustained over months of brutal treatment that was part of a hazing process.

In response, the ministry has come up with a number of measures, which can be accomplished in a short period of time, to improve conditions for young men drafted into serving mandatory military service as well as career servicemen and women.

These include raising the monthly salary of soldiers by 15 percent and increasing the unit cost of meals by five percent.

However, two long-debated subjects _ how to reform the military's judicial system and whether to institute an "ombudsman" program involving civilian monitoring staff to investigate cases of abuse _ are still being hotly debated.

Critics and activists argue that the military should fully engage itself in a discussion about the two issues to thoroughly reform habitual recurrences of wrongful treatment of personnel that has persisted over many years. But the military authorities currently have a negative attitude toward such open exchanges.

Advocates for reforming the military's closed system dealing with judicial affairs and instituting the ombudsman system say that less pressing issues, such as raising the salaries of soldiers, will contribute little to reshaping a military culture that has not evolved in decades.

The current lively debate on the possibility of change in the military was prompted by a number of shocking incidents that occurred recently.

In June, a sergeant identified only by his surname Lim went on a deadly shooting spree, killing five soldiers and wounding seven with a K-2 assault rifle at the Army's 22nd Infantry Division, whose jurisdiction includes the eastern coast that borders North Korea.

The death of a private first-class, identified as Yoon of the Army's 28th Division, also provoked controversy over inhumane treatment carried out in ranks. He died in April after a month of physical, mental and verbal abuse at the hands of his colleagues. The incident was made public at the end of July.

Vice Defense Minister Baek Seung-joo, right, and other military authorities appear before the National Assembly's Defense Committee, in this Aug. 20 file photo, to report the death of an Army private first class by hazing and discuss how to prevent future tragedies. / Yonhap

Judicial system

Currently, the military operates two kinds of courts _ a general military court, the court of first instance or initial trial court, and a high military court, the appeals court.

If a defendant or prosecutor lodges a second appeal following a decision by the high military court, the case then goes to the Supreme Court for a final ruling.

One of the most radical arguments regarding reforming the military's judicial system is a call to remove the military courts in peace time, and operate them only in times of war.

Those who support this idea say that this measure would be a way of strengthening the independence of trials, as it is an outdated practice that only officers should control the entire trial process in the military courts _ beginning from investigation, to indictment, through to the formation of judge panels and, ultimately, the issuance of rulings.

They claim that judges in civilian courts have sufficient professionalism to make a decision on military-related crimes and that abolishing the military courts is an international trend driven by efforts to guarantee the independence of military trials. Military courts currently don't operate in Japan, Sweden, Austria and Belgium.

As an alternative, some critics are demanding that those who commit a crime not strictly related to military affairs, such as traffic offenses, should be tried in the civilian courts.

However, the Ministry of National Defense is maintaining a negative position against such calls, saying that a considerable number of countries including the United States, China and Russia still operate military courts in peace time.

The military also cited a report produced by the National Assembly Research Service in April of last year that stated, "The time is not yet ripe for abolishing military courts, given the nation's security situation and the military's unique characteristics."

Instead, it is reviewing a measure to include civilian judges when judge panels are appointed, saying that this could be a way of guaranteeing the independence of trials.

Another controversial issue is centered on two conventions of the military courts.

One is that commanding officers are empowered to reduce sentences passed against offenders at their discretion. Critics say that this is one of the main reasons why inadequate punishments are given to soldiers convicted of crimes.

The other is allowing any officer to be appointed as a judge in the general military courts. Critics say this could be in violation of the rights of those accused to get a fair trial by judges.

At the end of August, Defense Minister Han Min-koo presided over a meeting with the chiefs of staff and heads of judicial affairs of the Army, Air Force and Navy, as well as the head of the ministry's prosecutor's office, to discuss these two conventions, though they fell short of drawing up any detailed plans.

However, the meeting was meaningful because it was the first time in six years that the military discussed ways to improve its judicial system. The last time was in 2008.

In July 2005, late President Roh Moo-hyun created a judicial reform committee under the direct control of Cheong Wa Dae that proposed abolishing the two conventions mentioned. Two years later, the ministry told the National Assembly that it agreed with the suggestions.

However, in August 2008, the ministry under President Park Geun-hye's predecessor President Lee Myung-bak changed its position and dismissed the committee's proposals, because it was "premature to carry out the plan," according to commentators in vernacular media.

As well as reigniting discussion on the reform of the military's judicial system, the ministry is now paying keen attention to nine related bills pending at the National Assembly.

However, this task is not that easy because a considerable number of those in the military's senior ranks believe that touching its judicial system amounts to weakening its roots. Most of them are said to be against such intervention by the civilian judicial system in the military.

Ombudsman program

The ministry is also reacting sensitively to discussions over whether to have a civilian ombudsman who will have full authority to inspect internal affairs in the military.

A bill proposed by Rep. Ahn Gyu-baek of the main opposition New Politics Alliance for Democracy on June 25, the 64th anniversary of the start of the Korean War, calls for placing such an ombudsman under the direct control of the National Assembly to allow them to conduct their duties independently for a two year fixed term of office.

The job of the ombudsman is to keep watch on human rights situations in order to help those with difficulties adjust to military life. Resolving conflicts and releasing information to the public would also be among the assigned duties of the office.

Furthermore, Rep. Han Ki-ho of the ruling Saenuri Party also proposed a bill in January 2013 intended to guarantee the human rights of draftees.

The ministry said it is now working on reviewing the two bills submitted by Ahn and Han to combine them into one before offering its proposals.

But insiders still have antipathy to the ombudsman program, saying that the powers suggested for the role seem excessive.

A committee for military culture reform was recently set up, co-chaired by Defense Minister Han and the former chairman of the right-wing minority Liberty Forward Party Shim Dae-pyung. The members of the committee reportedly have opposing views on the issue.

Given that conflict and antagonism still remain over calls from outside for reforms in the military, it remains to be seen whether the service can actually change itself this time.

Watchers say any final decisions will depend on how the National Assembly and Cheong Wa Dae deal with the associated legal issues.

Follow Jun Ji-hye on Twitter @TheKopJihye