High Court Faces Retrial Dilemma

The Supreme Court announced on February 1 that it classified 224 public security cases that are expected to be retried among the trials ruled between 1972 and 1987. It added that they are cases involving life sentences or capital punishment, or cases in which defendants experienced torture or illegal detentions.

The court sorted out 224 cases from 3,500 trials related to public security during the dictatorial regimes of former presidents Park Jeong-hee and Jeon Du-hwan since September 2005. It has also sought ways to correct the rulings by comprehensively admitting to its past errors.

The court, however, halted reviews of past rulings late last year after insiders suggested that the court could not solve the issues alone under the current law where the court is not allowed to change past rulings unless defendants appeal for a retrial.

Others in the Supreme Court reportedly proposed the review be delayed after 2008 in fear of being involved in political criticism by correcting past wrongs ahead of the presidential election at the end of this year.

“As retrials can be proceeded with individually in related courts only at the request of those involved in the cases, the court doesn’t have the power to choose or judge the cases that will be retried,” said court press secretary Byeon Hyeon-cheol on the court document, reflecting the opinion of some insiders.

Byeon added, “Under the current law, it is impossible for the court to restore the reputation of the defendants unless they appeal for retrial. So far, we have only reviewed the rulings in the cases.”

Regarding this issue, Jeong Jong-seop, a professor of constitutional law at Seoul National University, said in an interview with this paper, “The Supreme Court’s comprehensive retrial policy is not possible under the present legal system.”

But he also said, “The Supreme Court can clarify wrong rulings in past cases when they are retried. And that can make the courts that ruled on the cases accept the retrial appeals more easily.”

On the recent disclosure of the names of judges who made arbitrary rulings during the dictatorial regime, he said, “The revelation does not matter much as their names are already written on the rulings they made. But we should not criticize all the judges engaged in the decisions of the cases. That could defame them.”

woogija@donga.com