'Photo line' vs. human rights
By Park Moo-jong
.jpg?w=728)
The Constitution provides that a criminal suspect or defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty. The presumption of innocence is an international human right under the United Nation's “Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 11.”
But the reality is different. Prosecutors here presume every suspect is guilty. They do not hesitate to use the request for an arrest warrant against suspects as a trump card to obtain the desired effect of “punishing” them before going to trial.
The so-called “photo line” is also an attractive tool for prosecutors to have suspects punished by public opinion before their trial.
The photo line is not an English term but a “Konglish” one, coined by Korean photographers, meaning a line marked with yellow tape in front of the prosecutors' office where the person officially summoned for questioning or examination in the case of a warrant for detention stands for a while for a photo or question-and-answer session.
It is similar to the yellow-taped police line demarcating a crime or accident scene, which bystanders are not supposed to cross. The photo line was introduced by the news photographers' association in 2006 because of the overheated competition to get “better” pictures of suspects, mostly “political or economic big shots.”
The idea to introduce the formula came from an accident involving the late Hyundai Group founder Chung Ju-yung who suffered a piercing wound to his forehead after being hit by the camera of a photo journalist when he arrived at the prosecutors' office for questioning about his alleged violation of the Election Law in 1993.
Since the debut of the photo line 12 years ago, it has been used effectively for the convenience of reporters and prosecutors, despite disputes over the human rights infringement of suspects.
The practice, with no legal grounding, has caused a public stir of late over the prosecution allegedly making use of it in order to embarrass and shame the suspects.
The tragic case of a retired three-star general's suicide supports the allegation. Lee Jae-soo (1958-2018), the former commander of the Defense Security Command of the Armed Forces, stood at the photo line while handcuffed, Nov. 27, before attending an examination session for an arrest warrant requested by the prosecution for his suspected surveillance of civilians with regard to the Sewol ferry sinking in 2014.
The warrant was turned down by the court, but the ex-soldier jumped to his death from a Seoul building, Dec. 7. He reportedly chose the fatal option because he felt standing at the photo line, irrespective of guilt or innocence, was a disgrace itself.
Those who support the practice claim that the people have the right to know (about the suspected crime through questions and answers at the photo line. And it has the function to look into whether the investigation of power-related irregularities and crimes by business conglomerates is being conducted in a fair way, they say.
Yet, most of the suspects seldom speak about what the people are supposed to want to know. They keep silent or say, “I will reveal all at the prosecutors' office.”
The photo line has actually not been effective with regard to satisfying the people's right to know. Frankly speaking, the photo line has no legal grounds, but the suspects “can” reject it. The reality is that it is just for the convenience of photo reporters and prosecutors.
However, former Chief Justice Yang Sung-tae was an exception Wednesday. The nation's first head of the judiciary charged with alleged abuse of power while in office passed the photo line without answering reporters' questions on his way to the court for a review session on the arrest warrant requested for him.
Not only does the photo line go against the principle of “presumption of innocence,” but it has been abused to disgrace suspects as proven by the case of the retired general.
Having suspects, especially big shots in society, stand at the photo line is not any different from leaking unconfirmed facts about suspected crimes that may help people have preconceptions.
The press is responsible for establishing the photo line; but it is the prosecution that decides on whether to have suspects stand at the line or not. In short, prosecutors are armed with too much power in investigating crimes. The investigation of crimes should be the role of police. Prosecutors have only to oversee the police work.
The Korean-style photo line reminds people of an ancient judicial practice by which the guilt or innocence of the accused was determined by subjecting them to a painful or at least an unpleasant, usually dangerous experiences.
A vernacular newspaper recently quoted a Seoul judge as saying, “A suspect standing in front of tens of cameras is considered to have passed the first hurdle to determine guilt or innocence if he or she maintains a regal bearing, overcoming the oppressive feeling and humiliation.”
Indeed, those who experienced the formula later confessed that their legs and arms were trembling due to the shame and tension, and they felt their head become empty as soon as they stood at the photo line, surrounded by scores of reporters amid the camera flashes.
As the Constitution rules, all the criminal suspects should be presumed innocent until they are found guilty at trial, and their human rights must be protected in the course of criminal proceedings.
The Criminal Procedure Act has no clause to make it compulsory for the suspects to be summoned in public to bear the ordeal of the photo line. The practice should be scrapped according to the spirit of the law. Human rights must precede the convenience of the press and the prosecution in a democratic society.
Park Moo-jong (emjei29@gmail.com) is a standing adviser of The Korea Times. He served as the president-publisher of the nation's first English daily newspaper from 2004 to 2014 after working as a reporter since 1974.