White-collar crimes that aren't corrupt?

By Michael Bergmann

Again, Liberation Day was a day of celebration, at least for the 2,176 convicted offenders who were pardoned by the President on this occasion.

As always, the media were quick to help assure the public that "only white-collar criminals" were released. They may have abused power, bypassed democratic processes, misallocated taxpayers' money, eroded trust in public institutions and undermined fair competition. But don't be afraid, the prison gates are not opened twice a year for those who might hit you in the streets.

Even The Korea Times dutifully quoted the Ministry of Justice claiming that "those who had committed corruption or violent crimes ... were not considered." Corruption? Well, if we restrict the use of this term to its narrowest and most hard-core sense of abusing political or administrative influence for private profit, one could insist on categorizing illegal business practices like breach of trust, embezzlement, fraud and forgery as "non-corrupt white-collar crimes." One could, then, argue that the latter "only" eliminate freedom, fairness and equality from the market economy.

But why did the presidential pardon include, to give just one vexing example, a political top-aide who, according to the Korea Times, “was sentenced to five years and two months in prison for abusing his authority to give his acquaintances government projects while working as an adviser to former President Lee Myung-bak?" Could the Justice Ministry, as well as the media uncritically referring to it, explain in which possible sense this would not be a case of corruption?

Even more disturbing is the officially declared ― and widely tolerated ― motivation behind the numerous pardons. There could be, of course, respectable reasons for undoing judicial procedures: a rehabilitation of politically convicted critics after democratization, for example, or sheer benevolence. Pardons have been used to identify the unlucky Jean Valjeans of our time. (Some pitiable people at least seem included in the current list.) But the usually floated justifications are far from mercifully letting someone resume a decent humble life:

"With their rights and freedom restored, the beneficiaries are now allowed to return to their top posts at public companies or run for political office." Congratulations!

So often have we been told that the pardons are "needed to revive the economy" that hardly anyone seems to reflect on the implication: Does Korea really not have enough honest people to fill leadership positions and to faithfully run the country? A remotely similar argument dates back to colonial times when convicts were sent to be productive, with hard labor however, in distant places, on condition of never coming back. Are Korea's white-collar convicts really just the unlucky ones singled out among "all doing the same" by partisan prosecutors? Do we really need, after each government change, partisan pardons to restore such corrupt "equality?"

Michael Bergmann (bergmann2473@yahoo.de) is a teacher in Seoul.