hankyoreh

By Yeo Hyun-ho, legal correspondent

Even people convicted of sex offenses before the electronic ankle bracelet system went into effect may be required to wear one, the Constitutional Court ruled on Dec. 27.

The court affirmed the constitutionality of Article 2, Item 1 of the supplementary provisions to the Act on the Attachment of Electronic Tracking Devices (ankle bracelets) to Specific Sexual Offenders, which permits courts to order the wearing of ankle bracelets by sexual offenders who are currently serving sentences Sept. 2008 (when the system went into effect), or who completed their sentence less than three years ago.

Four of the justices found the provision constitutional, while five ruled it was either partially or fully unconstitutional.

Decisions are now set to be made on whether to order the wearing of bracelets by people with prior records for sex-related offenses. Courts had been holding off on bracelet orders while awaiting the Constitutional Court’s ruling. According to the Ministry of Justice, a total of 2,111 ankle bracelet-related cases were pending in South Korean courts as of late November.

The constitutionality review was requested by the Chungju branch of Cheongju District Court.

The Constitutional Court explained that the principle of non-retroactivity of criminal punishment did not apply to ankle bracelets because the bracelets themselves do not control the wearer’s behavior, distinguishing them from such after-the-fact punishments as incarceration that deprive offenders of their freedom.

President Lee Kang-kook and Justices Park Han-chul, Kim Yi-su, and Lee Jin-sung argued that the provision was partially unconstitutional, saying that issuing retroactive orders even in the cases of people who have completed their sentence violates the interests of people who have reason to believe their punishment to be over.

Justice Song Doo-hwan said the provision was fully unconstitutional, arguing that the principle of non-retroactivity should apply because the ordering of ankle bracelet attachment has a strongly punitive character.

A law requires the agreement of six or more Constitutional Court justices to rule it fully unconstitutional.

Please direct questions or comments to [english@hani.co.kr]