"Not a Pro-Japanese Collaborator vs. Public Unconvinced"… Controversy Over Retroactive Confiscation of LH Profits

Strengthening Punishment for Public Officials' Speculation in the Public Housing Special Act
Amendment Not Applied Retroactively... Principle of Non-Retroactivity
Heated Debate in the National Assembly... "Citizens Unconvinced"

[Image source=Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Moon Jiwon] Controversy has arisen as the National Assembly decided not to apply retroactively the amendment to the law that confiscates and recovers financial gains obtained through land speculation by public officials, including employees of Korea Land and Housing Corporation (LH). Initially, the government and ruling party showed strong intent to confiscate profits from LH employees suspected of speculation in the Gwangmyeong-Siheung district. However, during the National Assembly discussions, consensus was reached that "applying retroactive confiscation of property is excessive since they are not pro-Japanese collaborators."

According to the National Assembly and government on the 23rd, members of the Land, Infrastructure and Transport Committee decided on the 18th during the Land Law Review Subcommittee meeting not to apply the amendment to the Public Housing Special Act, which strengthens punishment for public officials involved in land speculation, retroactively. The minutes of the subcommittee meeting released that day reveal the lawmakers’ deliberations leading to the abandonment of retroactive application.

Cho Eung-cheon of the Democratic Party, subcommittee chair and former prosecutor, stated, "Retroactive effects of confiscation, recovery, or punishment are recognized only in cases like pro-Japanese or corrupt assets," adding, "If there was no law punishing the act at the time, and the crime is not one that can be naturally recognized as such, retroactive application is difficult."

He further explained, "Considering public legal sentiment, retroactivity might seem satisfying, but this requires very careful consideration." The idea of retroactive application was inspired by the Special Act on the Confiscation of Pro-Japanese Assets, which confiscates assets accumulated by pro-Japanese collaborators in the past. According to the principle of non-retroactivity of criminal punishment in criminal law, confiscation is considered a punishment and thus generally cannot be applied retroactively, though there are some exceptions.

However, Cho clarified that the Special Act on the Confiscation of Pro-Japanese Assets is different, stating, "During the Japanese colonial period, pro-Japanese acts were not punishable by law at the time, but they clearly constituted crimes under natural law and involved a sense of conscience, so when punishment provisions were later established, retroactive effect was exceptionally recognized," emphasizing that this case is different.

Democratic Party lawmakers Heo Young and Kim Gyo-heung, along with Justice Party leader Shim Sang-jung, continued to advocate for retroactive application. Lawmaker Heo said, "If these criminal acts are not punished, the public cannot accept it," and insisted, "Retroactive application must be explicitly stated in the supplementary provisions." In response, Cho argued, "Legislation cannot override the Constitution," and suggested, "Restricting their eligibility to acquire farmland or excluding them from land-for-land compensation could achieve similar effects."

Ultimately, the amendment to the Public Housing Special Act passed by the Land Committee did not include provisions for retroactive confiscation or recovery. The amendment is scheduled to be presented as an agenda item at the Legislation and Judiciary Committee. The bill includes provisions to impose a maximum life sentence or fines amounting to 3 to 5 times the illicit gains on public officials involved in land speculation, and allows for confiscation or recovery of the acquired property.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.