Abstract
Despite much controversy in the early stages of its implementation, the Anti-Corruption Act seems to have settled into our society to some extent. Despite these results, the Anti-Corruption Act is somewhat problematic in terms of legal interpretation. For example, it violates the principle of clarity because it has many prohibitions and many exceptions, and issues that were supposed to be naturally resolved as precedents accumulated are also facing much controversy and challenge due to the broad scope of application and abstract concepts. In addition, although the Commission on the Rights and Interests is conducting authoritative interpretations through questions and answers on various issues, it is difficult to handle them all in reality. Corruption prevention is a common problem and concern not only in our country but also in all countries that live in our time. It is a well-known fact that although trust in the government and public officials is somewhat increasing compared to the past, the problem of corruption in our country has not improved significantly. Since the enactment of the Anti-Corruption Act in 2015, it has been legislated for the purpose of preventing corruption among public officials and in the public sector. However, there have been some incidents that have increased the confusion caused by the legislation. There is confusion about the specific target of application due to the exception clause for agricultural and livestock products in the process of enforcement, the stipulation that the target of the law is public officials rather than civil servants, the repeated use of the term public institution, and the use of the unclear concept of a person performing public duties. Even if the purpose of the legislation is justified, if the clarity of the law is lacking, it is a law that is not suitable for a modern constitutional state, and correcting it would be more in line with the ideals of the Constitution. In addition, it is necessary to review expanding the target of the Anti-Corruption Act to private sectors with strong public interest such as medicine, finance, and the legal profession, and improvements such as simplification of reporting procedures and effective protection of reporters are necessary to secure procedural convenience.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callSimilar Papers
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
