THE RULE OF LAW AND EXPERIENCE OF THE KOREAN JUDICIARY

As a social norm, law in a democratic society should be established in the form of positive law by collecting opinions of people. In order for the rule of law to be properly practiced in a democratic country, the doctrine of separation of powers requires that the legislative, executive, and judicial functions should not be consolidated in a single body. However, even within a perfectly established legislative system, the principle of the rule of law may be distorted depending on the role of the judiciary. The experience of the Korean judiciary shows that even though it is designed to be a completely independent organ of the lawmaking National Assembly and the law-enforcing executive branch; it would fail to properly give effect to the country’s governing principle of the rule of law. It may be thought that the fundamental reasons lie in the endemic tendency towards the rule of man in East Asian societies. Nowadays, those who received education in a democratic society without experiencing the authoritarianism have begun to make inroads into the leadership of the judicial branch. They can be firmly determined to prevent freedom and rights of every single person from being infringed upon. In this way, they can be confident that the judiciary has fulfilled its roles in shaping a democratic country where the rule of law is exercised properly as a governing principle.     

The Logic of Legislative Leadership: Preferences,Challenges, and the Speaker's Powers

Principal agent theory implies that legislators will delegate power to a leader only when they need the leader's help and the leader can be expected to provide satisfactory help if granted power. This study is the first to evaluate the implied interaction between legislators' need for help and the degree to which legislators and leaders have similar preferences. By analyzing the Speaker's powers in the U.S. states, I arrived at three key conclusions. First, institutional leadership power responds to the interaction between preference alignment and policymaking challenges. Traditionally expected effects only appear when both alignment and challenges are relatively high. Second, professionalization causes weaker leadership powers. Finally, electoral competition correlates with stronger appointment, committee, and resource powers, but weaker procedural powers.     

THE POLICE AND HIGHER EDUCATION The Challenge of the Times

As law enforcement agencies continue to increase their educational standards, it is incumbent upon colleges and universities to offer curricula that prepare policemen to meet the challenge of modern times Criminal justice programs should pave the way for innovation and change in the police establishment by producing well-educated men, with a strong liberal arts background, capable of understanding self, community, and the role of the police in modem society.     

The Institutional Determinants of International Female Crime

In this article the author estimates the relative influences of the four broad social institutions of education, politics, family, and economy, plus the process of modernization upon proportionate female crime by using international data for 1974 derived from Interpol statistics. Each of the institutions is operationalized into three empirical indices, as is modernization, using data from the Handbook of International Data on Women. Then these 15 independent variables are intercorrelated with 7 specific categories of female offenses plus total female crime, each rendered in proportionate form as a ratio of female crime to all crime detected by the police in each category. The correlational analysis is constructed so as to constitute a test of three competing theories of female crime: the violence-prone “new female criminal,” the theory of economic need, and economc opportunity theory. The data provide only weak support for the theory of the “new female criminal,” but considerably stronger support for both the economic need and economic opportunity theories. It is not possible to choose unambiguously between the need and opportunity theories with the evidence at hand.