"국내법상 '정식 기소'와는 달라
예비심리 거쳐 군사 법원에 정식 기소할 예정
한국당국 추가 기소 가능"
- 주한미군범죄근절운동본부, 2005. 5. 19.
지난 5월 13일 주한미군사령부는 보도자료를 내고 금품수수, 성상납 의혹을 받아온 오산 미공군 헌병장교가 강간, 폭행, 뇌물수수, 절도 등 여러 가지 범죄 혐의로 미군 형법에 따라 기소되었다고 밝혔다. 하지만, 국내 형사소송법상 '정식 기소'와는 차이가 있는 것으로 드러났다.
이 미군 장교는 한국 검찰에서도 불법 총기 소지, 그리고 시민단체의 고발에 따라 금품수수, 성상납 등의 혐의에 대해 조사가 진행중이었다. 하지만 미군당국이 미군을 기소함에 따라 한국측의 재판권 행사 여부가 논란이 되었다. 혐의내용 중 강간, 뇌물수수 등의 범죄의 경우 피해자가 한국인이고, 비공무 범죄이기 때문에 SOFA(주한미군지위협정)에 따라 한국당국에 1차적 재판권이 있다. 그럼에도 미군당국이 먼저 기소를 하고 재판에 회부하여 1차적 재판권을 행사하게 되면 한국측에서 자동적으로 재판권 행사가 불가능한 것이 아닌가 하는 우려 때문이다.
그러나, 한미 당국은 현재 미군에게 적용된 여러가지 범죄혐의 중 한국법으로 처벌할 수 있는 일부 범죄 혐의에 대해서는 한국의 재판권 행사 및 사법당국의 추가 기소가 가능하다는 입장이다.
SOFA 형사사건을 담당하는 법무부 검찰4과에서는 금번 미군측의 조치는 한국 형사소송법 절차에 따른 '기소'는 아니라고 밝혔다. 굳이 가르자면 '기소'라기 보다는 '기소'(검사가 수사한 사건에 대해 피의자가 재판을 받는것이 마땅하다고 판단되어 법원에 회부하는 것)와 '형사 입건'(범죄혐의가 있다고 인정되어 수사를 개시하는 것)의 중간 단계에 해당한다는 설명이다.
보도자료 한글 번역판에 따르면, "데이비스는 중위는 미 공군과 한국경찰의 합동조사 결과 체포되어 민간사법절차와 동등한 미군형법 32조에 의한 청문회가 열릴 때까지 캠프 험프리에 있는 미군 시설에 구금되며 군사재판 소집권자인 미 제7공군사령관 게리 R. 트릭슬러 중장이 추가적인 결정을 내리게 될 것이다."고 나와있다.
여기서 청문회(hearing)란 미군 형법상 피의자를 군사재판에 회부(기소)하기 전에 그럴만한 상당한 이유가 있는지를 판단하기 위해 보강 수사를 진행하는 것으로, '예비 심리'의 성격을 가진다. 조사관은 수사 후 그에 합당하다고 여겨지는 처분내용을 최종 결정권자에 제안하게 된다.
보도자료 영어 원문에서는 "that(hearing) will consider the charges and recommend further action to the general court-martial convening authority, 7th Air Force Commander, Lt. Gen. Garry R. Trexler." : "'예비심리'에서는 범죄 혐의들을 검토하고 군사재판 소집권자인 미제7공군사령관 게리 R. 트릭슬러 중장에게 추가적인 결정을 제안할 것이다"고 하여 재판에 공식 회부(기소)하기 전 단계로서의 '예비심리'과정을 설명하고 있다. 또한, 한글 번역본에는 빠졌지만, "예비심리' 날짜는 아직 잡혀지지 않았고 자세한 사항은 법적 진행절차상 적당한 때에 일반에 공개되어질 수 있다"고 밝히고 있다.
한국당국의 추가 기소와 관련하여 법무부는 "현재 검토중이고, 수사 결과에 따라 기소할 수도 있다"는 입장만을 밝히고 있다.
현재 데이비스 중위는 불법 총기소지 건, 그외 기타 금품수수, 성상납 등의 건 등 크게 두가지 건으로 한국 검찰에 접수되어 각기 다른 검사가 수사를 진행중이다. 관계자들에 의하면, 불법 총기소지 건에 대해서는 재판권을 행사하기로 결정하여 기소를 앞두고 있으며, 시민단체들이 고발한 금품수수, 강간 등의 건에 대해서는 아직 수사가 진행중이다.
시민단체들이 고발한 건에 대한 수사 결과 한국 사법당국이 미군을 기소하기로 결정한다면 한국 사법당국이 기소한 혐의에 대해서는 한국측이 재판을 진행하고, 나머지 혐의들에 대해서는 미 군사법정에서 재판이 진행되어질 것이다.
---------------------------------- <참조> 미군 형법 제32조 및 해설
(a) No charge or specification may be referred to a general court-martial for trial until a through and impartial investigation of all the matters set forth therein has been made. This investigation shall include inquiry as to the truth of the matter set forth in the charges, consideration of the form of charges, and recommendation as to the disposition which should be made of the case in the interest of justice and discipline.
(b) The accused shall be advised of the charges against him and of his right to be represented at that investigation as provided in section 838 of this title (article 38) and in regulations prescribed under that section. At that investigation full opportunity shall be given to the accused to cross-examine witnesses against him if they are available and to present anything he may desire in his own behalf, either in defense or mitigation, and the investigation officer shall examine available witnesses requested by the accused. If the charges are forwarded after the investigation, they shall be accompanied by a statement of the substance of the testimony taken on both sides and a copy thereof shall be given to the accused.
(c) If an investigation of the subject matter of an offense has been conducted before the accused is charged with the offense, and if the accused was present at the investigation and afforded the opportunities for representation, cross-examination, and presentation prescribed in subsection (b), no further investigation of that charge is necessary under this article unless it is demanded by the accused after he is informed of the charge. A demand for further investigation entitles the accused to recall witnesses for further cross-examination and to offer any new evidence in his own behalf.
(d) The requirements of this article are binding on all persons administering this chapter but failure to follow them does not constitute judicial error.
Purpose
The Fifth Amendment constitutional right to grand jury indictment is expressly inapplicable to the Armed Forces. In its absence, Article 32 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (Section 832 of Title 10, United States Code), requires a thorough and impartial investigation of charges and specifications before they may be referred to a general court-martial (the most serious level of courts-martial). However, the accused may waive the Article 32 investigation requirement. The purpose of this pretrial investigation is to inquire into the truth of the matter set forth in the charges, to consider the form of the charges, and to secure information to determine what disposition should be made of the case in the interest of justice and discipline. The investigation also serves as a means of pretrial discovery for the accused and defense counsel in that copies of the criminal investigation and witness statements are provided and witnesses who testify may be cross-examined.
Procedures
An investigation is normally directed when it appears the charges are of such a serious nature that trial by general court-martial may be warranted. The commander directing an investigation under Article 32 details a commissioned officer as investigating officer, who will conduct the investigation and make a report of conclusions and recommendations. This officer is never the accuser. This officer may or may not have any legal training, although the use of military attorneys (judge advocates) is common within service practice. If the investigating officer is not a lawyer, he or she may seek legal advice from an impartial source, but may not obtain such advice from counsel for any party.
An investigative hearing is scheduled as soon as reasonably possible after the investigating officer’s appointment. The hearing is normally attended by the investigating officer, the accused and the defense counsel. The commander will ordinarily detail counsel to represent the United States, and in some cases a court reporter and an interpreter. Ordinarily, this investigative hearing is open to the public and the media.
The investigating officer will, generally, review all non-testimonial evidence and then proceed to examination of witnesses. Except for a limited set of rules on privileges, interrogation, and the rape-shield rule, the military rules of evidence (which are similar to the federal rules of evidence) do not apply at this investigative hearing. This does not mean, however, that the investigating officer ignores evidentiary issues. The investigating officer will comment on all evidentiary issues that are critical to a case’s disposition. All testimony is taken under oath or affirmation, except that an accused may make an unsworn statement.
The defense is given wide latitude in cross-examining witnesses. If the commander details an attorney to represent the United States, this government representative will normally conduct a direct examination of the government witnesses. This is followed by cross-examination by the defense and examination by the investigating officer upon completion of questioning by both counsel. Likewise, if a defense witness is called, the defense counsel will normally conduct a direct examination followed by a government cross-examination. After redirect examination by the defense counsel, or completion of questioning by both counsel, the investigating officer may conduct additional examination. The exact procedures to be followed in the hearing are not specified in either the Uniform Code of Military Justice or the Manual for Court-Martial.
The investigating officer, however, will generally:
-Announce the beginning of the investigation and its purpose
-Advise the accused of his or her right to counsel and ascertain whether the accused will be represented by counsel, and if so, by whom
-Formally read the charges preferred against the accused
-Advise the accused of his or her rights to make a statement or to remain silent
-Review the documentary or real evidence available against the accused
-Call any available adverse witnesses
-Review documentary or real evidence in favor of the accused
-Call any available favorable witnesses for the accused
-Hear any evidence presented by the accused
-Hear any statement the accused or defense counsel may make
-Entertain, if any, arguments by counsel
Upon completion of the hearing, the investigating officer submits a written report of the investigation to the commander who directed the investigation. The report must include:
-Names and organizations or addresses of defense counsel and whether they were present throughout the taking of evidence, or if not, why not
-The substance of any witness testimony taken
-Any other statements, documents, or matters considered by the investigating officer
-A statement of any reasonable grounds for belief that the accused was not mentally responsible for the offense, or was not competent to participate in the defense during the investigation, or there is a question of the accused’s competency to stand trial
-A statement whether the essential witnesses will be available at the time anticipated for trial or a statement why any essential witness may not then be available
-An explanation of any delays in the investigation
-The investigating officer’s conclusion whether the charges and specifications are in proper form
-The investigating officer’s conclusion whether reasonable grounds exist to believe that the accused committed the offenses alleged
-The recommendations of the investigating officer, including disposition of the charges
Upon completion, the report is forwarded to the commander who directed the investigation for a decision on disposition of the offenses.
Rights Of the Accused
The accused at an Article 32 investigation has several important rights.
The accused also has a right to waive an Article 32 investigation and such waiver may be made a condition of a plea bargain. If the investigation is not waived, the accused is entitled to be present throughout the investigative hearing (unlike a civilian grand jury proceeding). At the hearing, the accused has the right to be represented by an appointed military defense counsel or may request an individual military defense counsel by name and may hire a civilian attorney at his or her own expense. Again, unlike a civilian grand jury proceeding, the service member, through the member’s attorney, has the following rights: to call witnesses; to present evidence; to cross-examine witnesses called during the investigation; to compel the attendance of reasonably available military witnesses; to ask the investigating officer to invite relevant civilian witnesses to provide testimony during the investigation; and, to testify, although he or she cannot be compelled to do so.
The accused must be served with a copy of the investigative report and associated evidence. Within five days of receipt, the accused may submit objections or comments regarding the report to the commander who directed the investigation.
