Democracy in Korea that went too far

By Jay Kim

While the foreign press often praises Korea’s advancement in areas like education, culture and economy, they tend to have a low opinion of Korean politics, which is an assessment that I agree with.

While preparing for several speeches I was scheduled to give during my most recent visit to Korea, I thought about why this was the case.

One possible reason is the practice of hiding a murderer’s face. In Korean news, murderers always wear caps and masks to hide their faces, a practice that respects a murderer’s rights while ignoring the people’s right to know who that person is. This takes the concept of democracy too far.

Don’t people have a right to know what this cruel person looks like, so they can protect their family? In America, people do not forgive child molesters, even after they’ve finished their prison sentence.

People put up pictures of them around their town and demand that they leave, forcing them to pack up and hide for the rest of their lives in remote places where they are not recognized.

In contrast, while Korea doesn’t seem to care about the victims of these awful murders, they try to respect a murderer’s rights. The family members of the victims, whose hearts have been pierced with sorrow, are totally ignored. Who claims whose human rights for whom? This is a side effect of taking human rights too far.

Another possible reason is the culture of not caring about the criminal record of a candidate for public office. Last year, Lee Kwang-jae, a candidate convicted of bribery in a lower court was elected as the governor of Gangwon Province in his local election.

He was still on trial while elected, but in the middle of an appeal; later, he received a prison sentence in appellate court, and his duties were suspended simultaneously with his inauguration.

However, two months later the Constitutional Court ruled that suspending the duties of the head of a local government before a final court verdict is unconstitutional, and the man resumed his duties.

He eventually resigned as governor after losing yet again in Supreme Court. Some people argue that the choice of the people of Gangwon Province, who elected him to office, should be the final verdict. Why should being elected give him immunity from the law?

In the U.S., a candidate who has been found guilty of a crime during his campaign usually withdraws from the campaign voluntarily.

I’ve never seen a case where the candidate keeps appealing the decision, believing that winning the appeal would be great but losing it would not be a big deal. Claiming that a candidate for public office is innocent until proven guilty can also be taken too far.

Another reason may lie in the public hearings in the National Assembly. A recent minister nominee was grilled publicly over frivolous suspicions about his wife’s real estate speculation. When did it become a crime to make some reasonable amount of profits from real estate investment?

We all know the purpose of investments is to make a profit. Does this mean that only those who lose money from investing deserve to be minister? This just looks like a way to find a fault with the nominee over nothing.

A hearing is not supposed to be a TV drama, and I do not understand why they waste time and money on these hearings, especially when they don’t really matter. After all, the President is allowed to appoint the nominees, even if the Congress votes them down.

In America, it is unimaginable for the President to pardon 1 million criminally convicted people. President George W. Bush had faced a major controversy just by granting amnesty to less than 10 people.

After the Korean President pardoned 1 million people marking the March 1 Independence Movement and the Aug 15 Liberation Day, I wondered why they bothered with the original verdicts of the courts, instead of just sentencing their punishment to end on those days. It’s probably only in Korea that 1 million convicts can be pardoned by the President.

One final possible reason is the massive street demonstrations in Korea, where protesters are routinely seen beating up police. During these street protests, the road is blocked by police buses, causing major traffic jams.

Hundreds of cars cannot go anywhere until the protesters are broken up. In the U.S., those who physically attack the police are often shot, and demonstrations are not allowed to block off roads. Those who have to pass through there have the right to do so.

The exercise of one’s rights cannot intrude on the rights of others. In Korea, traffic should be controlled during these protests to allow passage on one side. My right should be exercised without infringing on others’.

Jay Kim is a former U.S. congressman. He serves as chairman of the Washington Korean-American Forum. For more information, visit Kim’s website (www.jayckim.com). The views expressed in the above article are the author’s own and do not reflect the editorial policy of The Korea Times.