South Korea Marks 25 Years Without Executions... Is 'Complete Abolition' Possible?

Last Execution of 23 Death Row Inmates in 1997
10 Years of No Executions Marks 'De Facto Abolition of Death Penalty'
21st National Assembly Proposes Death Penalty Abolition Bill
Third Constitutional Review Underway... This Year's Verdict Anticipated
Civil Society: "From Death to an Era of Peace and Life"

A lighting performance calling for the abolition of the death penalty is being held in front of the Seodaemun Prison History Hall in Seodaemun-gu, Seoul. 2020.11.30.
[Image source=Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Lee Gwan-ju] December 30, 1997. In the final year of the late President Kim Young-sam's administration, the death sentences of 23 death row inmates were carried out. Since then, up to the beginning of 2022, not a single execution has been conducted in South Korea.

This year marks the 25th anniversary since the last execution was carried out in South Korea. The international community already classifies South Korea as a "de facto abolitionist country" where no executions have been carried out for more than 10 years. The Korean government also cast its first-ever affirmative vote on the "Moratorium on the Death Penalty" resolution at the 75th United Nations General Assembly plenary session held in New York on December 16, 2020. This was an official declaration domestically and internationally of the government's stance not to carry out executions.

However, regardless of whether executions are carried out, the system has not yet led to complete abolition of the death penalty. Whenever serious crimes occur, voices demanding the revival of the death penalty arise, and some argue that the death penalty should be maintained legally as a symbolic measure of strict punishment. The question of whether to keep or abolish the death penalty remains one of the "hot potatoes" in Korean society.

Human rights and civic groups strongly advocate for the abolition of the death penalty. From the 15th National Assembly to the 21st, a total of nine bills aimed at abolishing the death penalty have been proposed in every session. However, none have passed the National Assembly. In the 21st National Assembly, on October 7 last year, Representative Lee Sang-min of the Democratic Party of Korea introduced a "Special Act on the Abolition of the Death Penalty." This bill proposes replacing the death penalty with life sentences such as "life imprisonment" and "life imprisonment without parole," where the convict is detained in prison until death without the possibility of parole.

Those advocating for abolition cite two main reasons. First, the deterrent effect of the death penalty has not been proven. In Canada, which abolished the death penalty in 1975, the homicide rate per 100,000 population decreased by 44% after abolition compared to before. In the United States, studies show that states that have abolished the death penalty have even lower homicide rates per 100,000 population. In other words, the presence or absence of the death penalty does not lead to the prevention of serious crimes.

The most critical issue is that if the death penalty is carried out due to errors by investigative agencies or judges, even if the real culprit is later revealed, the wrongful victim cannot be compensated. In South Korea, there are cases such as the "Lee Chun-jae 8th Murder Case," the "Samrye Nara Super Robbery and Homicide Case," and the "Iksan Yakchon Five-way Intersection Case," where the accused were exonerated through retrials after being wrongfully convicted. Had they been sentenced to death and executed, the truth of these cases would never have come to light.

The Constitutional Court is conducting its third constitutional review of the death penalty system, following reviews in 1996 and 2010. The court ruled the system constitutional by 7 to 2 votes in 1996 and 5 to 4 votes in 2010. For the current review, international and national organizations such as the European Union (EU), the National Human Rights Commission, and Amnesty International have submitted official opinions stating that the death penalty is unconstitutional. The Constitutional Court may reach a conclusion within this year.

The Joint Conference of Religious, Human Rights, and Civic Organizations for the Abolition of the Death Penalty recently issued a statement saying, "Those who commit crimes and harm others must receive appropriate punishment," but also appealed, "However, the state must not take the same brutal approach of taking life as revenge by saying that because a heinous crime was committed, death is deserved. If the state plays a role in brutal violence, the vicious cycle of repeated violence cannot be stopped."

Civil society has also publicly questioned presidential candidates about their alternative positions on the abolition of the death penalty. The organizations stated, "We want to hear from all candidates that 'the essential gateway to becoming a human rights state is to achieve complete abolition of the death penalty,'" emphasizing, "Let us move beyond the era of death and together advance toward an era of peace and life."

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