General Practice Law at North Korea
I. OVERVIEW OF GENERAL PRACTICE LAW IN NORTH KOREA
North Korea’s legal system is heavily state-controlled, based on principles codified in the Socialist Constitution of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and related laws:
1. Key Legal Frameworks
Constitution of the DPRK (enacted 1972, amended multiple times)
Establishes the supremacy of the Workers’ Party of Korea (WPK) and defines the state’s legal authority.
Citizens are granted certain rights, but these are subordinate to party policies.
Criminal Law (Penal Code, 1999)
Governs crimes, punishments, and criminal procedures.
Includes offenses like counter-revolutionary activity, economic crimes, and political dissent.
Civil Law (Civil Code, 1987)
Covers contracts, property, inheritance, and family law.
Functions largely to regulate economic and domestic matters under state supervision.
Administrative Law
Governs daily life, labor, and movement of citizens.
Includes regulations on residence, employment, and travel permits.
2. Characteristics of Legal Practice
Party Supremacy: Legal practice is subordinate to the Workers’ Party’s directives.
Limited independent judiciary: Courts follow policies rather than independent interpretation of law.
Lack of published case law: Legal precedents are not publicly available; most knowledge comes from defectors, NGOs, or UN reports.
Administrative enforcement: Many “legal” actions are carried out by security organs rather than through formal courts.
II. ILLUSTRATIVE CASES / INCIDENTS OF LEGAL APPLICATION
Although formal case law is not published, some incidents illustrate the application of general practice law in North Korea. Below are six well-documented illustrative cases:
1. Case of Jang Song-thaek (Executed 2013)
Facts
Jang Song-thaek, uncle of leader Kim Jong-un, was accused of corruption, treason, and anti-party activities.
Legal Basis
Charges were based on “counter-revolutionary acts” and abuse of power under the Penal Code.
Outcome
Executed following a party-directed trial; no independent judicial process was reported.
Significance
Demonstrates the use of criminal law for political purposes and the lack of judicial independence.
2. Case of Illegal Market Trading (2010s)
Facts
Citizens involved in black-market trading of goods (e.g., food, electronics) were arrested.
Legal Basis
Violations under the Criminal Law, Articles on illegal economic activity.
Outcome
Sentences ranged from labor camps to public execution in some cases, often decided by local security organs.
Significance
Illustrates enforcement of economic regulations and the limited rights of accused individuals.
3. Case of Religious Activity (Reported 2005–2015)
Facts
Individuals practicing Christianity or attempting to proselytize were arrested.
Legal Basis
Charged under laws against anti-state religion and counter-revolutionary activity.
Outcome
Sentences included labor camps or execution, often without formal trial.
Significance
Shows how civil liberties are restricted and how law is applied for ideological control.
4. Case of Defection Attempt (Multiple Reports 2000–2020)
Facts
Citizens attempting to cross the border illegally into China or South Korea were detained.
Legal Basis
Penal Code provisions on treason, illegal departure, and espionage.
Outcome
Punishments included long-term prison labor, forced relocation of families, or execution in extreme cases.
Significance
Reflects how criminal law enforces state security priorities rather than individual rights.
5. Case of Corruption Among Local Officials (2011)
Facts
Several local administrators were accused of embezzlement and abuse of office.
Legal Basis
Penal Code articles on misappropriation of state property and dereliction of duty.
Outcome
Punishments included execution, public shaming, or forced labor.
Significance
Shows that legal practice often enforces party discipline and administrative hierarchy.
6. Case of Foreign Journalist Detention (2014)
Facts
A foreign journalist was detained for alleged “hostile acts” against the state.
Legal Basis
Charged under espionage and anti-state activity provisions.
Outcome
Released after diplomatic negotiations; demonstrates selective application of law in politically sensitive cases.
Significance
Illustrates that law is applied inconsistently and often serves political or diplomatic goals.
III. THEMES ACROSS CASES
Political control dominates law
Criminal and administrative law is often applied to maintain party authority.
Lack of judicial independence
Courts follow directives rather than legal principles; decisions are often predetermined.
Limited transparency and procedural rights
Trials are secret, appeals are rare, and punishments are severe.
Use of law as a tool of social control
Laws regulate economic activity, religion, movement, and loyalty.
High penalties for minor infractions
Even low-level economic or social violations can trigger harsh punishments.
IV. CONCLUSION
In North Korea:
General practice law exists mainly as codified statutes (Criminal Code, Civil Code, Administrative Regulations).
Courts and case law are not publicly accessible, so legal practice is inferred from reported incidents and defector testimonies.
Law serves the state and party goals, not independent justice, with harsh enforcement for perceived political, economic, or ideological violations.
RELATED Blog
comments