Introduction
The North Korean judicial system is established on the Soviet Model. It comprises of Special Courts, local People’s Assembly, the Provincial and special city level courts, and the Supreme Court of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. The present North Korea judicial system is described as a defense of dictatorship of proletariat for applying and protecting the Communist Party policies. The system had its foundations put in place the end of Second World War and in 1948, the period when the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea was established. All the major philosophies adopted during the pre-constitutional period were integrated in the Constitution, which are still applicable to date ( Tan, 2015). This paper seeks to discuss North Korea’s judiciary and the important aspects of criminal procedure. The Supreme People’s Assembly (SPA) appoint the judges of the Central Court, which is the highest court.
North Korea Legal Tradition
North Korea’s legal tradition is read based on the specific hierarchy of authority. The legal tradition is designed and controlled by the state. The legal tradition is read by the personal directives of Kim Jong-un, followed by the WPK directives, which include the Ten Philosophies for instituting a Monolithic Ideological System. The WPK directives involves the mainly from North Korean Constitution, the WPK Charter and domestic civil laws, and the policy guidance of the WPK Secretariat Organization and Guidance Department ( Tan, 2015).
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The overarching structure of North Korea’s Court System
North Korea has a tri-level court system, comprising of approximately 100 people’s courts, twelve provincial courts, and a Central Court. A special court comprises of the military court that works on unlawful cases under its jurisdiction. In North Korea, all courts share a similar composition as the Central court. The Supreme Court of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, which comprises of two Peoples’ Assessors and a Chief Justice. In some cases, three judges may be present. The terms of office correspond with those of the Supreme People’s Assembly members. Theoretically, the judicial system is held answerable to the SPA. However, when the legislature is not in session, the Presidium of the SPA ( Tan, 2015).
The judiciary system is not independent and does not offer fair trials because the penalties are stiff. In most instances, the security forces restrict the actions of the judiciary such that many cases are foregone. It hinders the judiciary from practicing judicial review, meaning they do not have the power for judicial review. This has been identified as a common problem in North Korea that needs to be addressed urgently. North Korea lacks an independent judiciary and fails to acknowledge individual rights such that acts like torture and killings are common, which are widespread and severe ( Tan, 2015).
The current constitution is the fifth one that was accepted and adopted in September 1998. This was a replacement of the constitution adopted previously in 1972. The new constitution describes North Korea as a socialist state, which represents the needs and interests of its citizens. One of the major functions of the Judiciary system is to sustain the power of the government ( Tan, 2015).
Due Process Procedures followed once People are accused of a Crime in North Korea
Little information is known regarding the procedure followed if a person is accused of crime in North Korea. North Korea punishes criminals under a “three generation punishment rule”. If one individual is accused of a criminal offense or arrested, and sent to a prison camp, the offender will be arrested along with his entire family and the two subsequent generations who will be born at the prison camp must remain there for the rest of their lives ( Baik, 2016).
North Korea is recognized for its poor human rights conditions and detention of thousands of Protestants regularly. Punishing offenders along with their families is a violation of liberty thus against the human rights principles. Its human rights record is identified as the worst worldwide and has been condemned globally. It is obvious that no legal procedures are observed in the process of arresting and punishing offenders. Moreover, the death penalty issued to offenders is a violation of the right to life. North Korea is one of the 58 nations globally that still practices death penalty. This is perpetuated by the totalitarian system in the country ( Baik, 2016).
The System in North Korea
The North Korean legal system is inquisitorial system. In the recent decades, various nations that applied the traditional inquisitorial system have changed to adversarial models. The reason is that the inquisitorial system has become inefficient and cumbersome and does not have transparency. This is the case in North Korea, where the system is inefficient and lacks transparency because individuals are arrested, and tried unfairly ( Cohen, 2015).
T he inquisitorial system differs from the adversarial system in significant ways. The adversarial systems involves presentation of evidence in trials, which offers lawyers a more prominent role compared to judges. The adversarial trial evidence is obtained majorly from sequences of question-and-answer between witnesses and lawyers. On the other hand, in inquisitorial trials judges are given a more prominent role whereby they establish legal trial accounts majorly through written witness statements ( Cohen, 2015).
Qualifications of Lawyers and Judges in North Korea
In North Korea, for one to be a lawyer, they must first join the Choson Bar Association. The Central Committee of the association defines the professional standards of an individual then qualifies or disqualifies them. The committee gathers requests of legal representations from the lawyers, then assigns them cases and pays them remunerations. Therefore, after passing the National Judicial Examination and completing a training course that runs for two years at the Judicial Research and Training Institute, the lawyer may be appointed as a judge ( Natsios, 2015).
The Power of Judicial Review
In North Korea, the judiciary does not exercise the power of judicial review over the legislative actions or executive constitutionally. The power of the judicial review lies with the Central Court. This is the highest court comprising of judges appointed by the SPA. Based on North Korea’s constitution, the Central court is answerable to the subjects’ judges of the Criminal Code and the SPA ( Natsios, 2015).
Similarities and Differences between North Korea Judiciary and U.S Court Systems
The North Korea judiciary has a Central Court as the highest court. It consist of judges appointed by the SPA. On the hand, the U.S Court system has the Supreme Court as the highest court. It comprises of nine judges, selected by the president and confirmed with the Senates consent and advice. Other courts include the U.S Courts of Appeal, U.S District Courts, state and Country Courts. Additionally, in the U.S, the judiciary is independent and has the power of judicial review. However, in North Korea, the judiciary does not have independence and does not exercise power of judicial review. It is evident that there is a significant difference between the judicial system in North Korea and the U.S. From studying the legal practices of the other, North Korea could learn about the significance of providing the judiciary with the power of judicial review. This will allow them to work effectively and acquire their independence without interferences from other departments ( Pakes, 2017).
Conclusion
It is evident that North Korea has poor judicial system that is considered inhumane. The judiciary is not an independent system and this has affected its effectiveness and responsibility of protecting its citizens. The offenders are punished by a “three generation punishment rule” that involves punishing. Therefore, there is urgent need for reformations to be done on the North Korea’s constitution and legal system to prevent violations of human rights.
References
Baik, T. U. (2016). Nonjudicial Punishments of Political Offenses in North Korea—With a Focus on Kwanriso. The American Journal of Comparative Law , 64 (4), 891-930.
Cohen, R. (2015). Human Rights and Humanitarian Planning For Crisis in North Korea. International Journal of Korean Studies .
Natsios, A. S. (2015). Transitional Justice in North Korea Following a Change of Regime: An Exploration of Four Possible Scenarios. In Transitional Justice in Unified Korea (pp. 221-234). Palgrave Macmillan, New York.
Pakes, F. (2017). Comparative criminal justice . Routledge.
Tan, M. (2015). North Korea, international law and the dual crises: Narrative and constructive engagement . Routledge.
