Han Myeong-sook and Geomeon Yuchak... Yoon Seok-yeol's Leadership Tested Inside and Out

Han Myeong-suk Petition Case, Ministry of Justice Inspection Department and Supreme Prosecutors' Office Human Rights Department Conflict Remains
Conflicting Legal Interpretations on 'Attempted Coercion' in Media-Prosecution Collusion Investigation... Concerns Over Fairness

On July 25 last year, Yoon Seok-yeol, Prosecutor General, attended the inauguration ceremony held at the Supreme Prosecutors' Office in Seocho-gu, Seoul, and delivered his inaugural address. Photo by Jinhyung Kang aymsdream@

[Asia Economy Reporter Choi Seok-jin] The case involving former Prime Minister Han Myeong-sook's petition and the issue of 'media-prosecutor collusion' involving a certain prosecutor general are once again shaking Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-yeol's leadership. The future developments of these two cases appear to have explosive potential that could escalate into questions about Yoon's continuation in office.

Yoon gained some time by stepping back after clashing with Justice Minister Choo Mi-ae over the former Prime Minister Han's case. The Justice Minister's side also seems to be avoiding further escalation of the conflict.

However, the media-prosecutor collusion case involving Yoon's close aide is unfolding in a complex manner, making it difficult to predict future developments. Suspicions have even arisen that Yoon might be obstructing the investigation to protect the prosecutor general close to him.

◆ Phase of reconciliation between the Ministry of Justice and the prosecution... The key is the prosecution's investigation results = According to the Ministry of Justice and prosecution sources on the 22nd, the visible differences in perspective and conflict between Minister Choo and Prosecutor General Yoon regarding the petition related to former Prime Minister Han, which surfaced last week at the National Assembly's Legislation and Judiciary Committee, seem to have been temporarily avoided as Yoon followed Minister Choo's instructions.

Regarding the previous day's announcement from the Supreme Prosecutors' Office stating "We will comply with Minister Choo's instructions," the Ministry of Justice said on the same day that "there will be no separate statement," implying that there is nothing particularly problematic.

However, despite the Supreme Prosecutors' Office's measures, the question of which department is primarily responsible for the case?whether it is the 'Supreme Prosecutors' Office Inspection Department' to which the Ministry of Justice initially sent the case, or the 'Supreme Prosecutors' Office Human Rights Department' reassigned by Prosecutor General Yoon?remains unresolved, leaving a spark of conflict.

Yoon stated the previous day that the Supreme Prosecutors' Office Inspection Department and the Central District Prosecutors' Office Human Rights Supervisory Office are sharing materials and conducting necessary investigations. He also designated the Supreme Prosecutors' Office Human Rights Department as the department overseeing the investigations of both units.

This stance contradicts Minister Choo's position, who views the matter as a case requiring inspection for "prosecutors' misconduct." However, considering that Minister Choo criticized the appropriateness of the case assignment but did not specifically instruct to "restore the original assignment," it is difficult to say that Yoon disobeyed the minister's orders.

From Minister Choo's perspective, she will monitor the progress of the investigation, but if the Supreme Prosecutors' Office Inspection Department's investigation does not proceed smoothly as per her instructions, or if the Central District Prosecutors' Office's investigation is delayed, she may leave room for further extraordinary measures.

◆ The 'media-prosecutor collusion' investigation involving a close aide is a burden for Prosecutor General Yoon = The Central District Prosecutors' Office investigation team has already confirmed certain facts related to the media-prosecutor collusion allegations that surfaced through an MBC report at the end of March, based on analysis of evidence such as audio recordings obtained during a search and seizure.

What remains is the legal issue of whether the 'attempted coercion' charge can be applied to Channel A reporter Lee and Prosecutor General Yoon's close aide, the prosecutor general. Opinions differ between the Supreme Prosecutors' Office and the Central District Prosecutors' Office on this matter.

Last week, the Central District Prosecutors' Office investigation team reported a plan to summon the prosecutor general as a suspect under the 'attempted coercion' charge and to request an arrest warrant for reporter Lee, judging that the charge could be applied. However, suspicions have newly emerged that the Supreme Prosecutors' Office did not approve this and instead ordered supplementary investigations.

However, it is known that the Supreme Prosecutors' Office Criminal Division, after legal review, mostly agreed?except for the head of the Criminal Division?that applying the 'attempted coercion' charge is difficult.

Since early this month, Prosecutor General Yoon has reportedly entrusted the command of this case to the Supreme Prosecutors' Office Chief Prosecutors' Meeting, composed of the Deputy Prosecutor General and heads (prosecutor general level) of five departments related to investigation and prosecution.

In this situation where legal interpretations differ between the Supreme Prosecutors' Office and the Central District Prosecutors' Office, Yoon appears to have chosen to convene a professional investigation advisory panel to avoid disputes over fairness. Unlike the Prosecution Investigation Deliberation Committee, which consists of experts from various professions, the professional investigation advisory panel is composed of legal experts such as prosecutors, lawyers, and law professors.

Therefore, in a situation where opinions differ between the Supreme Prosecutors' Office and the Central District Prosecutors' Office regarding the possibility of establishing 'attempted coercion' based on the same facts, even though the advisory panel's opinion is non-binding, it is highly likely to have a decisive influence on the conclusion of this investigation.

If the advisory panel, like the investigation team, issues an opinion that "prosecution of reporter Lee and Prosecutor General Yoon's close aide is necessary," and actual prosecution follows, pressure for Yoon's resignation from some quarters is expected to intensify.

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