Only Two Approved Mugshots Twice
52 Out of 54 Refused... Replaced by ID Photos
Rights Commission Survey Shows 96.3% Support for Expanded Disclosure
19 Bills Submitted in National Assembly
As heinous crimes such as violent assaults with weapons and rape-murders continue to occur, public opinion is growing in favor of expanding the scope of suspect identity disclosure. However, it has been confirmed that none of the 19 bills related to identity disclosure submitted to the 21st National Assembly have been processed, and all remain pending. Since the National Assembly will shift to election mode after the regular session in September, if the bills are not passed during this session, they are highly likely to be effectively discarded.
Mugshots of Choi Yoon-jong (left), the Gwanaksan rape and murder suspect who agreed to have his photo taken and released, and Lee Seok-jun, the Songpa family protection murder suspect.
According to the police on the 25th, among 54 suspects whose identities have been disclosed since 2010, only two had their mugshots (photographs recording the suspect’s appearance) released. On the 23rd, the mugshot of Choi Yoon-jong (30), the suspect in the 'Gwanaksan rape-murder' case whose identity disclosure was decided, was released along with his name and age. Previously, in 2021, Lee Seok-jun (27), who killed a family under protective custody in Songpa, also had his mugshot released after the decision to disclose his identity. This was possible because they consented to the photographing and release of their mugshots.
The police can disclose a suspect’s identity under the Specific Violent Crime Act if the crime is brutal and has caused serious harm, if there is sufficient evidence to believe the suspect committed the crime, and if it is necessary for the public interest such as ensuring the public’s right to know, preventing recidivism, and crime prevention. However, under current law, mugshots can only be taken and disclosed with the subject’s consent. The suspects Cho Seon (33) in the Sillim-dong weapon assault case and Choi Won-jong (22) in the Bundang weapon assault case refused to have their mugshots taken and disclosed, so only their ID photos and CCTV footage were released.
There is strong public opinion that the photographing of mugshots for violent criminals should be mandatory and that the scope of identity disclosure should be expanded. According to a survey conducted by the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission from August 26 to September 9, 96.3% (7,196 out of 7,474 respondents) supported expanding identity disclosure. To enhance the effectiveness of the system, 95.5% (7,134 respondents) agreed to the release of mugshots showing the current appearance of the criminals.
Photo of the driver's license (left) of Choi Won-jong, the Bundang knife attacker who refused to have his mugshot taken and released, and a CCTV footage image of Jo Seon, the Sillim-dong knife attacker.
In the 21st National Assembly, 19 bills have been proposed to expand the scope of identity disclosure for violent criminals. These include one bill on the disclosure of identity information of suspects of certain serious crimes and 18 partial amendments to the Special Act on Punishment of Specific Violent Crimes. However, as of the 25th, all 19 bills remain pending in the Legislation and Judiciary Committee. Among them, 13 bills were proposed this year, but six bills proposed in 2020 (1), 2021 (4), and last year (1) have not passed the subcommittee stage.
These bills mainly propose ▲disclosure of appearance within the last 30 days ▲disclosure of the defendant’s identity after indictment ▲disclosure of identity for child and disabled abuse crimes ▲prohibition of name changes for those subject to identity disclosure ▲and establishment of disclosure methods by presidential decree. In June this year, Rep. Jeong Jeong-sik of the People Power Party introduced a bill to expand the crimes subject to identity disclosure to include domestic and foreign crimes, violent crimes such as murder, sexual crimes, sexual crimes against children and adolescents, and drug crimes. The bill also stipulates that mugshots should show the appearance within 30 days before or after the disclosure decision and allows photographing when necessary. Reps. Song Eon-seok, Park Hyung-soo, Yang Geum-hee, and Kim Yong-pan of the People Power Party, along with Rep. Kim Yong-min of the Democratic Party, proposed a bill requiring the release of appearance within 30 days. Bills proposed by Democratic Party members Ahn Kyu-baek, Lee Hyung-seok, Hong Ik-pyo, and People Power Party member Park Deok-heum include provisions to photograph suspects in a way that allows identification and not to cover their faces during identity disclosure.
Additionally, Reps. Hong Seok-jun and Park Dae-chul of the People Power Party proposed a bill to expand identity disclosure to include defendants after indictment. This aims to address cases like the ‘Busan spinning kick incident,’ where identity disclosure requirements were not met at the initial investigation stage due to charges such as grievous bodily harm, or where identity disclosure failed because the suspect’s status changed to defendant. Reps. Jeon Yong-gi and Kang Hoon-sik of the Democratic Party and Rep. Lee Ju-hwan of the People Power Party proposed bills to include child abuse offenders among those subject to identity disclosure.
However, according to the minutes of the subcommittee meetings, discussions on the amendment to include child abuse offenders in the scope of identity disclosure were halted due to concerns about the risk of secondary harm to victims or their families. The separate identity disclosure bill proposed by Rep. Jeong Jeong-sik has also faced criticism for needing to specify and clarify the expansion of crimes subject to identity disclosure, leading to controversy. The bill proposed by Rep. Jeon Yong-gi has not been properly discussed since it was referred to the subcommittee in August 2020, three years ago, and the bill proposed by Rep. Im Ho-seon to prohibit name changes for those subject to identity disclosure has seen no discussion since its referral in September 2021.
Experts emphasize the need to expand the identity disclosure system through prompt legislative amendments. Shin Yi-cheol, a professor in the Department of Police Science at Wonkwang Digital University, said, "Current law only states that faces can be disclosed during identity disclosure but does not specify when the photos should be taken. At the very least, the law should be amended without delay to require the release of photos taken at the time of arrest or after detention." Lee Woong-hyuk, a professor in the Department of Police Science at Konkuk University, said, "From the perspective of ensuring the public’s right to know regarding public safety issues, identity disclosure for violent criminals should be further expanded," and added, "The National Assembly should promptly process the related bills."
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
