The Korean public generally believes that the socially and economically weak are subject to discrimination in law enforcement. Fairness, however, lies at the heart of the law, and we cannot expect the law to fulfill its functions to the fullest extent unless it is fair. Fairness of the law can be categorized into fairness of the law itself and fairness in the enforcement of the law. The former is not heavily challenged as it requires multiple stages of legislative process which allow various opinions to be reflected. Public confidence remains low, however, for the latter and poses as an obstacle to the establishment of the rule of law.
The purpose of this study is to examine public perception of fairness in law enforcement. To do so, four questions were asked in order to assess whether the public perceived the law to be enforced fairly in the Republic of Korea. The questions were formulated to measure how the respondents thought factors such as social status, money, power and poverty influenced fairness in law enforcement. The survey showed that over 70% of the respondents said they believed money and power influenced fair enforcement of the law. Only 55.2% of the respondent answered that the law was enforced fairly irrespective of one’s social status. On the other hand, 76.3% believed the rich tend to evade punishment for violating the law, and 79.2% said the same for those with power. Of all respondents, 79.1% said those who are poor and powerless are punished more severely for the same offense. In short, around half of the respondents believed the law was enforced unfairly, whereas over 70% had the perception that factors such as money and power undermined fair enforcement of the law.
Such a perception, however, is undesirable in that it may manifest itself in mistrust in the law itself and pose as a significant obstacle to the establishment of the rule of law. In this sense, it is important to enhance fairness in law enforcement and to convince the public of the same.
On the fairness in law enforcement by types of crime (irrespective of an offender’s social or economic status), the respondents perceived that the law was enforced fairly for murder, robbery, theft, assault, insurance crimes, driving under the influence, illegal/violent protests and drug-related crimes. On the other hand, the respondents answered sexual assault, fraud, false accusation, gambling, tax evasion, bribery, embezzlement, dereliction of duty, crimes by public officials, real estate speculation, environmental crimes, food crimes, economic crimes and election crimes were punished leniently.
To analyze fairness in criminal trial procedures and outcomes, fairness in criminal procedures at the police, public prosecutors’ office and court level, and impartiality of criminal investigation, prosecution and trial from media or power, the respondents were asked to rate fairness in criminal trial procedures and the fairness in criminal trial outcomes on a scale of four points. Both categories had similar results, with the former receiving 2.65 points on average and the latter 2.61 points.
A comparative analysis of public perception on law abidance and law violation between 2008 and 2012 survey results, respectively, showed a positive change where the respondents showed significantly less tolerance for law violations. In a comparison of public perception on the level of rule of law(on a scale of seven points) in nine areas including politics, economy, election of public officials, public order, traffic order, basic life order, labor relations, assembly and demonstration, and media, both surveys revealed that the public perceived the level of the rule of law to be high in the areas of traffic order, basic life order and public order, while the lowest in the area of politics.
The most important change identified in the comparative analysis was that the level of the rule of law was perceived to have increased all areas but media. In politics, economy, public order and labor relations, in particular, statistically significant results were shown. In the four areas of election of public officials, traffic order, basic life order, and assembly and demonstration, there was an increase in the average value although not statistically significant.
In 2012, the public perceived that the rule of law was relatively better established in various areas of society than it was in 2008.
Public perception on the fairness in law enforcement is gradually improving but not enough to earn full confidence. Less people now believe that those with less social and economic power are discriminated against, while there is still mistrust in law enforcement for discrimination against such people.
Without fairness the law has no life and cannot fulfill its functions. While this study is limited in providing an accurate picture of public perception on the evel of the rule of law on a nationwide scale, it may provide an indicator of the perception on and the level of the rule of law. Implementation of these surveys on a regular basis is necessary to grasp an understanding of the changes in public perception of the rule of law and the level of law abidance, and thereby contribute to policymaking.