Vigilant punishment should not take place
Notorious child rapist Cho Doo-soon who angered the people with his violent sexual attack on an eight-year-old girl will be released on Dec. 12. Cho kidnapped the victim on her way home from school to a church restroom in Ansan, Gyeonggi Province, in December 2008 to violently beat and rape her. She was left with severe injuries resulting in permanent internal damage.
Cho came under a barrage of criticism with his malicious criminal act. Despite the public expectation for a heavy punishment, the court gave a disappointing ruling, sentencing him to 12 years in prison. It said Cho at that time was weak mentally and physically due to the influence of alcohol. Public criticism has been growing against the ruling, given the permanent mental trauma for the victim coupled with physical injury. The victim, her family and their neighbors have also been expressing a sense of insecurity ahead of Cho's release.
The incident threw fundamental questions over the role and limit of the state in charge of protecting the people. In the wake of the case, a series of bills were legislated for the purpose of extending the statute of limitations, curbing cuts in prison terms for crimes committed under the influence of alcohol and introducing one-on-one monitoring for sexual predators.
We welcome the package of measures as they are meant to strengthen punishment and prevent recurrences of such heinous crimes, thus help create a more stable and safer environment. Yet, still many people also cast skepticism whether such legal devices will be effective in reality.
In 2017, more than 600,000 people participated in a petition posted on Cheong Wa Dae, opposing the planned release of Cho. Recently an increasing number of YouTubers have vowed vigilante justice. But we oppose any kind of street justice as such private revenge will only undermine the foundation of the state. It is another kind of crime and should not happen under any circumstances. We fully understand the wrath over Cho but the solution should be found within the legal framework.
There is no system in the world that can prevent crime perfectly. All systems have their own flaws and need to be revised and improved continuously. But any attempt to leap over such limits at once may trigger another problem. Against this backdrop, it is inappropriate to attempt to isolate heinous convicts over the possibility of them committing another crime after release for an additional one to 10 years.
Such scheme reminds us of the past evil law exploited for the purpose of cracking down on anti-government figures under the authoritarian regimes. Double punishment for the same crime also violates the principle of the Constitution. It is better to raise the penalty standard against heinous convicts while strengthening the correction system for inmates.