Just read this in the Korea Times:

http://times.hankooki.com/lpage/nati...6443511960.htm

Apparently the Korean Supreme Court says USFK contractors are under Korean jurisdiction.

whats y'alls take on it?

I agree. Look at it like this, I may be wrong but who's law would they fall under? They are contractors not Military, the Military cannot punish them to a point. But if they hurt someone because they do not obey a law then I guess he should have obey'd the law.

If you look around, even the Military has given in to Korea for punishment of Soldiers.

If you break the law or how ever you want to put it, as i say to some of my Soldiers do what you think your rank can handle....If you screw up off base then be prepared to face Korean law, when they are done with you then then the military will handle you.

__________________
CH-47 SI

They must find it difficult...

Those who have taken authority as the truth, rather than truth as the authority. --Gerald Massey

my concerns is that the article said it was upholding the convinction of a USFK contractor who accidently poured embalming fluid down the drain at Yongsan and it wound up in the Han in around 2001 (the defendant left the country and never attended the trail). That would concern me but then again I'm just a univ teacher here so what do I know?

The contractors have pushed not to be considered USFK. It was primary due to curfew, but they have pushed for some time now to fall under Korean law, not USFK. If any of them complain about this law then they are trying to have it both ways.

__________________
Visit USFK Classifieds, the FREE classifieds in Korea!

I've seen people, including lawyers, on the bloggs who know much about the SOFA debate this issue back and forth.

What I took from it was:

there are differences in the types of non-Korean civilian workers within USFK.

Some of them, like the guy in the water dump case, were covered under the SOFA --- so that if they were accused of a crime that occured as part of their official duties, they were under USFK jurisdiction. But, of course, just like with soldiers, if what they were doing had nothing to do with their role with USFK whatsoever, they were subject to Korean criminal law.

I wasn't a soldier in Korea, or a soldier period, so I don't know about what kinds of people are doing what jobs and what the difference is between this civilian worker and that one ---

but my guess is that ----- sometime in the future -- several years down the road --- this will become a big issue - if USFK hasn't packed up and left by then.

Some civilian contractor who USFK would normally believe falls under the SOFA is going to be involved in some accident --- like perhaps driving in a convoy and killing someone in an accident ---- and the Korean mood at the time will be one where they feel like exercising long pent up anti-US feelings -----

----and USFK will refuse to hand the guy over (like they did the mortuary guy) --- and all hell will break loose yet again.

I wouldn't hold my breathe looking for it ----- because the kinds of things where a civilian incident would come up aren't many.

There aren't many times when GIs do something that causes a real SOFA collision ------ usually the GI crimes that make the news are ones where the GIs are always handed over to the Koreans and found guilty.

Interesting situation. I have not read the article; however, it appears to be very similiar to a US government supervisor who directed his employee to dump the chem down the drain? The supervisor was always available and it was my understanding he made trips to and from the ROK. If they really wanted him they could have picked him up at any time. None the less SOFA is a very convoluted issue.
.
When USFK was under threat of the terriost who came out only after midnight, <LOL> the contractors working with USFK were required to follow the curfew. They held SOFA status and received benifits (PX, commissary ..) from USFK. I can assure you there were some who violated the curfew and were out of Korea within a week. There are obviously contractors in country working with Korean companies who would not come under SOFA. These miscreants who make the new are turned over to the ROK authorities usually receive lighter punishment than they face if the military dealy with them. I do not believe the victim(s) would receive compensation.

__________________

Chill

There are many definitions of "Contractors"; Some are employed by the U.S. Government, and certain jurisdictions apply. Some are employed by Korean companies and by other foreign Governments in Korea. Some are hired by the U.S. Government, but they work for Civilian Companies.
To get a reading on particular jurisdictions is generally like was said,- were they acting in an official capacity at the time of an incident, or were they off duty? Many of us are dual status, that is , we are U.S. Military retirees, AND we are Civil Service , OR we are Contractors, and it gets complicated. Any doubt must be adjudicated by legal representatives.

There was an incident where the Military wanted to nail a military retiree on "Breaking curfew". They gave that up.
The controversy a while back occurred when the 8th Army wanted to enforce their curfew restrictions on Department of the Army Civil Service Employees. The Army lost that one. The Civil Service Employees are pretty much at the mercy of the Army, as most performance reports are written by
military officials. So, when asked by competent authority, it is prudent to comply. Getting in trouble downtown with Korean authorities is not conducive
to improving relations at work.

Joe;

I am sure if we are referring to the same curfew policy imposed by the past regime. I notice you stated the Army wanted to impose on DA Civil Service employees. "They Lost That One"?

ALL military, US cilivilan, and contractors on contract to USFK were affected by the policy. There were people who had lost their jobs when caught violating the curfew. The JAG office released the ROE to protect against the abuses of the MPs. One of the last casualties of the policy was a 60 yo guy who attempted to evade the MPs and was tackled while attempting to escape. In the process his leg was fractured. There was also legal suits filed for back pay by some DPW employees who were not allowed to leave the installation after their shift finished and curfew was in effect. This was in the papers.

I am not sure we are talking about the same policy though.

__________________

Chill

There are so many twists and turns between the various laws that could apply to a person working for the military in Korea that double and even a triple jepardy could apply. Sofa status has little to do with having to pay the piper in a Korean court if you have broken a Korean law and are being held by Korean authorities. Many of the civilians working for the military are also retired military which means they would be subject to the UCMJ, Korean law and would also face ramifications for any 'embarassments' they create, on their civilian job. It can get quite messy for the person who gets into these sticky situations.