Search

Under the premise that the Korean peninsula is unified as the "Republic of Korea" that upholds the rule of law and liberal democracy, transitional justice is one of the most imperative issues that must be dealt with for the justice of the oppressed North Koreans and for a peaceful future of unified Korea. Peace-building and reconciliation efforts post-Korean unification are essential. However, how to achieve this remains a challenge. This article aims to answer the question on achieving peace and reconciliation post-Korean unification through the use of plea bargaining in the international legal context. Plea bargaining has been used in international criminal tribunals such as the ICTY and the ICTR. The question is not about whether plea bargaining can be used in international criminal cases but it is about whether plea bargaining is an effective means transitional justice to bring about peace and reconciliation. This article will discuss cases of transitional justice and cases of plea bargaining in the international legal context and apply how the implementation of plea bargaining will play a role in peace-building and reconciliation on the Korean peninsula post-Korean unification. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The concept of restorative justice emerged from efforts to find an alternative to the traditional punitive, retributive reaction to crime. The belief that face-to-face meetings are able to address the diverse needs of all involved parties has eventuated in the proposal of an informal process to discuss the aftermath of crime. One local district court in Korea was very keen to test this process and conducted a project to examine the applicability of restorative justice in Korean criminal trials. Investigating the processes and outcomes of this project, this study identifies challenges in officially adopting such a programme in Korea. In particular, this study raises questions regarding what form of justice Korean citizens truly desire. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]