[Chuiyakgukga] ① U.S. Cuts Recidivism Rate... "Let's Introduce Dedicated Drug Courts"

■ Chapter 5. Solving the Drug Problem Together


U.S. Drug Courts Cut Recidivism Rate in Half

Judges, Prosecutors, Lawyers, and Treatment Experts Form Teams

Strengthening Restorative Justice... Improved Treatment Effectiveness

If a strong control tower is to be established at the pan-governmental level, voices are being raised in the judiciary to introduce a "dedicated drug court division." The idea is to foster judges who understand the characteristics of drug-related crimes, such as addiction and dependence, and to strengthen the restorative role of the judiciary by linking rulings more closely with treatment.

In fact, the United States, which has introduced the drug court system, has reduced the recidivism rate of drug offenders by nearly 60%. This has also resulted in reduced economic and social costs. This outcome is attributed to judges serving not only as "arbiters," but also as "facilitators" who directly supervise the treatment process and adjust sentences based on rehabilitation outcomes.

Restorative Justice in the U.S. Halved Recidivism Rates

ChatGPT Generated Image

According to All Rise, a U.S. nonprofit organization, as of May 22, the drug court system has reduced the recidivism rate of drug offenders by up to 58%. A study last year on the drug court in Midland County, Texas, found that 97% of participants did not reoffend after completing the treatment program. This means the recidivism rate dropped to just 3%. In contrast, about half of those who did not participate or failed to complete the program reoffended.

The core of the drug court system is to treat addiction as a disease rather than a crime and to support the recovery and social reintegration of nonviolent offenders through treatment programs instead of incarceration. In the U.S., about 120,000 people go through drug courts annually, and the cumulative number of program graduates has surpassed 1 million. While annual incarceration costs per person are about $50,000, rehabilitation costs through drug courts are only around $8,000 to $9,000 per person.

According to a study by the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) in November 2011, the recidivism rate for participants in the drug court program was 40%, compared to 53% for the control group (non-participants). When considering the analysis that recidivism was reduced by about 58%, the recidivism rate for those who completed the drug court program is estimated to be around 16%. In Korea, the recidivism rate remains at around 33-36%.

The economic impact was also clear. The program was found to reduce judicial and custodial costs, among other benefits. In fact, the program reduced costs by an average of $6,000 (about 900,000 won) per participant, totaling $168 million (about 252 billion won). In addition, the social reintegration of participants generated an economic benefit of $25,921 (about 3.89 million won) per person.

Judges Shift from Mere Arbiters to Rehabilitation Facilitators

The United States declared a "war on drugs" in the 1970s, but it ended in failure. Policies that focused on punishment rather than treatment led to diversification of supply chains and the so-called "balloon effect," with an increase in overseas production sites.

All Rise derives its name from the phrase "all rise," which is called out when a judge enters the courtroom. It is an organization that establishes the standards and guidelines for "problem-solving courts" such as drug courts. It is the largest and most influential entity in the field worldwide. The United States first introduced the drug court system in Miami, Florida, in 1989, aiming to address the repeated recidivism that occurred due to a lack of proper treatment following punishment.

Once participation in the program is decided, about one year of treatment begins. A team led by a judge—including prosecutors, defense attorneys, probation officers, and treatment professionals—manages participants. Participants appear in court regularly every two to four weeks and are subject to random drug testing at all times. Treatment and counseling are conducted in parallel at specialized medical institutions.

The court continuously receives updates on treatment progress and immediately imposes rewards or sanctions. If negative drug test results are repeated, the court supports treatment costs; in case of violations, measures such as curfew restrictions or short-term detention are imposed. As of last year, there were 3,881 drug courts across the U.S. The system is further subdivided into categories such as adults, veterans, DUI offenders, and juveniles. However, those convicted of sex crimes or serious violent crimes are generally excluded from participation.

"A Realistic Alternative... Adopt as a Dedicated Court Division"

The U.S. drug court system is considered to be quite suitable for Korea's situation as well. In Korea, every administration has regarded drug-related crime as an absolute evil and pursued punishment-centered policies. However, due to the lack of accompanying treatment and rehabilitation, drug-related crimes have actually increased, and recently, the problem has surged through the IT infrastructure.

Experts also agreed on the necessity of restorative justice measures such as drug courts. Rather than the lengthy legislative process required for broad judicial reform, the introduction of a "dedicated drug court division" is being discussed as a realistic solution. Hwang Seokjin, a professor at the Graduate School of International Information Security at Dongguk University, stated, "It is a sufficiently realistic alternative," adding, "It is known that in the U.S., the recidivism rate is significantly lower and the cost-saving effect is also substantial for those who complete rehabilitation."

Kim Heejoon, managing partner at LKB Pyeongsan, who oversaw drug investigations as head of the Violent Crimes Division at the Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Office, also emphasized, "It needs to be introduced urgently." He proposed, "After establishing a dedicated drug court division, cases should be closed upon completion of treatment and rehabilitation programs, and if the defendant fails to comply, the case should be referred to a formal trial."

Cho Yoonoh, a professor at the College of Police and Criminal Justice at Dongguk University, pointed out that the judiciary paradigm must shift to problem-solving courts. Professor Cho said, "It is time to change the paradigm that focuses solely on determining guilt or innocence," and emphasized, "As the number of offenders has increased significantly and youth issues have also become serious, the drug court system is necessary."

Some also believe that strengthening the expertise of judges should take priority. Yoon Haesung, Senior Research Fellow at the Korea Institute of Criminology and Justice, shared an anecdote about a juvenile judge who left due to a sense of mission and pointed out, "Because judges rotate positions, it has been difficult to establish specialized courts for drug and cyber crimes when proposed." He diagnosed, "For restorative justice to succeed, human resources innovation in the judiciary that allows for the accumulation of expertise is the key."

Special Reporting Team | Jang Heejun, Oh Jieun, Park Hosoo, Lee Jiye, and Park Jaehyun

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.