Prosecutors' Chiefs Meeting Expected to Condemn "Minister Chu's Unjust Investigation Orders"... Spotlight on Reunited 'Yoon Seok-yeol Faction'

Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-yeol is expected to decide on the 3rd whether to accept Minister of Justice Choo Mi-ae's investigation directive regarding the so-called 'media-prosecution collusion' suspicion case. The Supreme Prosecutors' Office will hold meetings with high-ranking prosecutors nationwide in the morning and afternoon to discuss whether to accept Minister Choo's investigation directive. The photo shows prosecutors entering the Supreme Prosecutors' Office building that day. Photo by Kim Hyun-min kimhyun81@

[Asia Economy Reporters Seokjin Choi and Hyungmin Kim] The series of chief prosecutors' meetings held on the 3rd are expected to become a platform for denouncing the unfairness of Minister of Justice Choo Mi-ae's investigative directives issued the previous day.

It is known that the majority of chief prosecutors view Minister Choo's investigative directives as unjust and worry that they could set a bad precedent undermining the independence of the prosecution. Accordingly, many chief prosecutors are expected to advise Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-yeol to 'refuse to accept the investigative directives,' according to observations inside and outside the prosecution.

However, regarding the method of refusing the investigative directives despite criticism of 'insubordination,' Prosecutor General Yoon is anticipated to face deep deliberation.

◆The De Facto No-Confidence by Stripping the General Prosecutor’s 'Investigative Directive Authority' = Since Prosecutor Han Dong-hoon, considered a close aide of Yoon, was involved as a suspect in a case and Yoon’s decision to convene a professional investigative advisory panel sparked controversy, opinions rejecting Minister Choo’s directive to 'halt the advisory panel procedure' are also expected to emerge at the meeting, with some saying there is 'no grounds to refuse.'

However, the removal of Yoon’s supervisory authority over the investigation into the alleged collusion between the prosecution and the media can be interpreted as a de facto vote of no confidence in the Prosecutor General, so it is expected that an overwhelming majority of chief prosecutors will express opinions of 'non-acceptance' or 'objection.'

Article 7, Paragraph 2 of the Prosecution Service Act stipulates that when there is a disagreement regarding the legality or legitimacy of a superior’s supervisory directive related to a specific case, a prosecutor may raise an objection. However, there is a divergence in interpretation as to whether this provision can serve as grounds for the Prosecutor General to object to the Minister’s investigative directive.

Chief Prosecutor A said, "If a public official follows an incorrect or illegal order, they should be disciplined," adding, "Regardless of the legal interpretation of whether the Prosecutor General has the right to object, if something is wrong, shouldn’t it be said so?" He continued, "In the past, during Chief Prosecutor Choi Dae-gyo’s tenure, when investigating a bribery case involving the Minister of Commerce and Industry, the minister resigned after refusing to comply with an unfair order from the Minister of Justice and proceeding with prosecution."

Inside and outside the prosecution, it is widely anticipated that Prosecutor General Yoon will either openly reject Minister Choo’s investigative directives or accept the directive to halt the professional investigative advisory panel but refuse to comply with orders to refrain from involvement in the investigation.

Some have suggested a third alternative of appointing a 'special prosecutor' to take charge of the investigation. However, the Ministry of Justice drew a clear line on this, stating on the day, "Claims for replacing the investigation team or appointing a third special prosecutor are already belated, lack justification and necessity, and contradict the Minister’s orders."

◆Attention on the Reassembled 'Yoon Seok-yeol Faction' Response = Among the three meetings held that day, the chief prosecutors’ briefings for the metropolitan area and provincial prosecutors’ offices at 2 p.m. and 4 p.m. are particularly noteworthy. This is because many of Prosecutor General Yoon’s close aides, classified as the 'Yoon Seok-yeol faction,' will attend.

Jeju District Chief Prosecutor Park Chan-ho (former head of the Public Investigation Department at the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office), Daejeon District Chief Prosecutor Lee Doo-bong (former head of the Scientific Investigation Department), Changwon District Chief Prosecutor Moon Hong-sung (former head of the Human Rights Department), and Jeonju District Chief Prosecutor Noh Jeong-yeon (former head of the Trial and Litigation Department) will gather in the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office conference room.

It is also of interest whether Seoul Central District Chief Prosecutor Lee Sung-yoon, who has clashed with Prosecutor General Yoon and triggered the current situation, will attend the meeting and face them. Although an official attendance notice was sent from the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office, it remains uncertain whether Lee will actually attend.

If Lee attends, there is a possibility that the scene from the February meeting at the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office conference room could be reenacted.

At that time, ahead of the general election investigation, during a meeting of chief prosecutors nationwide, Gwangju District Chief Prosecutor Moon Chan-seok strongly criticized Lee in front of other chief prosecutors for refusing Yoon’s order to indict those involved in the 'Blue House election interference' allegations.

Recently, criticism has also emerged within the prosecution that reports related to the investigation of collusion between the prosecution and the media are being made directly to Minister Choo instead of Prosecutor General Yoon, raising the possibility of critical remarks against Lee, who has appeared to defy Yoon.

◆Negative Views on Internal Objections within the Prosecution = Meanwhile, within the prosecution, there have also been negative opinions regarding the Prosecutor General’s objection to the Minister’s investigative directives and the chief prosecutors’ meetings.

Deputy Chief Prosecutor Jin Hye-won of Daegu District Prosecutors’ Office posted on social media the previous day, criticizing the nationwide chief prosecutors’ meeting as a "social club without legal basis." She added, "Decisions made by a social club have no effect, so it is difficult to recognize them as legitimate objections."

Jin listed provisions of the Prosecution Service Act and wrote, "Since the Prosecutor General is also a prosecutor, they must follow the orders and supervision of their superiors and may raise objections if they have any," and "Since the Prosecutor General belongs to the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office, according to the 'Guidelines on the Operation of Consultative Bodies for Rational Decision-Making,' they can hold meetings through the 'Supreme Prosecutors’ Office Chiefs’ Meeting' to discuss whether to accept the Minister’s orders."

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