South Koreas Constitutional Court - Essay Example

South Korea’s Constitutional Review in Contrast with the US’s Task: South Korea’s Constitutional Review in Contrast with the US’sIntroduction The constitution is a tool meant to bring justice for all on equal grounds in a country. The fact that political influence on the judicial system is rampant in most countries cannot be involved. This can be clarified by comparing the US and South Korea. In some cases, the elites take advantage and defy the constitution or influence ruling. However, the constitution can also be used to prevent the elites from oppressing the less influential.

Principled versus political motives in judicial decisionsIt is normal for any constitution review to be based on neutrality and free from political influence for fair trials to be achieved. As such, the judicial court systems operate independently despite the profile of the case or the people involved. The constitution in the US caters for the restriction of gun and marijuana. The national fire arm act (1934), the gun control act and the Brady bill among others stated the rules and set regulation of ownership.

However, in 2009, the US begun considering a review of these regulations just like in South Korea. The motive behind the gun control, however, is more political and elite influenced than neutrally viewed. For instance, Chicago mayor Daley’s protection is catered for by the taxpayer’s money in hiring the bodyguards, but the citizens are denied by law to defend themselves using guns. The drug controls on the other side in the US traffickers are hunted down more than the users.High profile casesIt is evident that the elites who take part in most court cases have political motives rather than the quest for justice.

As for this issue, a politician may decide to pick on a case in court for the purpose of gaining political ground or fame. Cases in Korea of such kinds arise when there is disagreement between different parties or individuals in the line of politics (Dae & Tae-gyu, 1990, p. 138). As such, the constitution is often defied by the political systems. In the US, this is not the case. The influence of “parties” is not let in any way except for the amicus curiae in common terms “friend of the court” This requires filing.

Court as a reliable civic institutionCourt is viewed as an option in the effect that the political influence is hindered. When the political strong holders cannot have any influence in achieving their interest, the court can be used in ensuring balanced justice. In the case of varied opinion on issues under controversy, the political influence and interest may overpower any other option. Taking an example of the gun ownership and marijuana use in the US, the political sides have always been against them thus influencing most cases in court.

Similarities in the trends, in both the US and South Korea are that the political will is followed in most cases.Judicial review is a double edged swordAs much as the judicial review maybe working well for the interest of justice, it has negative implication on other sides. The individuals who lack political power and economic power may in most cases are disadvantaged. At the same time, the elites may be prevented from oppressing the less endowed. Todd (2012) found out For instance that, in the US, the constitution is followed in such a manner that the less influencing citizens are not favoured in cases like gun ownership.

At the same time, in South Korea, the elites get influential over most cases rather than the court exercising the power of neutrality effectively. The constitution can also prevent the law breaking to the disadvantage of the less political in cases such as the use of marijuana by any member of the state. Conclusion From the above illustration, the justice system can work for different countries in different ways. This depends on the case and the established a system to ensure no influence by the elites.

By Comparing Korea and the US, the influence of the political sides and elites can be realised in both cases for some constitutional legislations.ReferencesTodd, D. et al. (2012). State and Local Politics: Institutions and Reform. Stamford, CT: Cengage Learning. Dae, K .Y. & Tae-gyu, Y. (1990). Law and political authority in South Korea: Issue 2 of IFES Korean studies series. Colorado, CO: Westview Press.