"Counsel, Speak for Only 30 Seconds"

Deliberation committees lack legal expertise
Lawyers' right to assist is frequently restricted
Up to 14 cases handled in just two hours

"Counsel, aren't you prohibited from representing both sides? I'll report you to the media."

That was what a member of a school violence countermeasures deliberation committee in Gyeonggi Province said to a lawyer recently. After middle school student A reported being assaulted and was then accused in a counter-report by the other student, the lawyer representing A submitted separate notices of representation for the reporting student and the student reported against.

According to the lawyer, the notice of representation for the reporting student was printed on red paper, while the one for the student reported against was printed on blue paper. The committee member mistakenly thought the lawyer was representing two students on opposing sides at the same time.

The Seoul Bar Association, headed by Cho Sunyeol, announced the results of a survey of 630 lawyers with experience handling school violence cases at a forum on improving school violence deliberation procedures on October 14, 2026. Respondents identified "the composition of committees and lack of expertise" (24.9%) and "infringement of the right to assistance of counsel" (17.9%) as issues requiring urgent improvement.

Right to assistance of counsel left to chance

Lawyers said that at school violence committee hearings, they had heard comments infringing on the right to assistance of counsel, such as, "This isn't a court of law, so lawyers aren't allowed to speak," "There's no time, so you have only 30 seconds," and "If you speak now, I won't give you another chance to speak."

Even when hearings were held by the same district office of education, opportunities for lawyers to speak and the scope of assistance they were allowed to provide varied from one hearing to another. A lawyer affiliated with the Seoul Bar Association told the Legal Times, "On one occasion, I was allowed to state my position only at the start of the hearing and then had to leave; on another, I wasn't permitted to speak until near the end." The lawyer also said, "I had to obtain the minutes later through a request for disclosure of information to find out what questions the student had been asked and how they had answered."

Lawyers specializing in school violence cases also said it was a problem that the committees did not provide case materials in advance. They said, "Even in criminal trials, you can review the indictment beforehand, but in school violence cases, they tell you nothing," and, "The allegation was given in a single line as 'verbal and physical violence,' so I attended the hearing without even knowing the specific facts."

Detailed procedures left to discretion

The reason lawyers' assistance and access to case materials are restricted is the lack of specific procedural rules. The current School Violence Prevention Act provides students and their guardians with an opportunity to state their views and allows them to request disclosure of the minutes after deliberations conclude. However, it contains no provisions on lawyers' attendance at deliberations, the scope of their right to speak, or advance access to case materials.

The Ministry of Education's "2026 Guidebook for Handling School Violence Cases" also states, "Other matters necessary for the operation of the deliberation committee shall be determined by the head of the district office of education." With no detailed standards in place, actual hearings are being conducted in an ad hoc manner, lawyers said.

Kim Seongho, a member of the school violence committee at the Seoul Western District Office of Education and a member of the Seoul Bar Association's executive committee (passed the 8th Korean Bar Examination), said, "Materials are provided only on the day of the hearing, so we have to review everything in just one hour beforehand." He added, "We need to strengthen the role of committee members with legal backgrounds and guarantee sufficient time for review."

The Seoul Bar Association's survey also cited a case in which "14 school violence cases, including one involving more than 1,000 pages of evidence, were deliberated in less than two hours."

Another concern is that there are limits to correcting errors in school violence committee decisions after the fact. A transfer order in particular directly affects a student's academic schedule and school life, and it is difficult to reverse even if the decision is later overturned.

According to the Ministry of Education's guidebook, within seven days of notifying a school of a transfer order, the principal must ask the superintendent of education or another relevant authority to assign the student to a school. Even if a student files an application for a stay of execution with a court, it can take two to three weeks for the court to issue a decision. This means the transfer may already have been carried out before the court reaches a conclusion.

Yoon Minseon, chief spokesperson for the Seoul Bar Association (passed the 11th Korean Bar Examination), said, "There is no prospect of improvement under the current system, which leaves the operation of school violence committees to the discretion of their chairpersons. The law must specify when lawyers may participate, guarantee opportunities for them to speak, and prohibit disadvantages resulting from their exercise of the right to assist." Lawyer Kim Seongho said, "Issues such as protecting confidentiality should be addressed by requiring lawyers to sign an undertaking not to remove materials and imposing stronger penalties for violations. This would also broaden lawyers' opportunities to review records in advance."

Seo Hayeon, Legal Times reporter

※This article is based on content supplied by Law Times.

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