Channel A Journalists Association: "Pretrial Judge Admits Political Consideration"... "Should Have Balanced Informant and MBC Investigation" (Comprehensive)

Entrance of Channel A headquarters, Jongno-gu, Seoul.
[Photo by Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Choi Seok-jin] The Channel A branch of the Korea Journalists Association expressed strong regret, stating that the warrant judge’s issuance of an arrest warrant for former Channel A reporter Lee Dong-jae, based on an assumed collusion with a high-ranking prosecutor that has not yet been revealed through investigation, is tantamount to “admitting political consideration.”

According to the legal community on the 19th, the Channel A branch stated in a press release issued the previous day, “We express serious regret over the issuance of the arrest warrant for reporter Lee Dong-jae.”

The Channel A branch pointed out, “The warrant judge’s statement about ‘discovering the substantive truth and restoring trust between the media and the prosecution’ does not constitute grounds for detention,” adding, “Since the collusion relationship has not yet been revealed, the judge’s remarks, which seem to take the so-called ‘media-prosecution collusion’ as a given fact, amount to the judge admitting to political consideration.”

Additionally, the Channel A branch said, “‘Extensive evidence destruction’ is also inappropriate,” emphasizing, “The prosecution received this reporter’s mobile phone from the company and publicly announced that ‘major evidence has been secured during the investigation process, and we are substantially approaching the substantive truth.’”

They further criticized, “Despite the reporter responding to multiple prosecution investigations, it is unfair for the court to detain him.”

Finally, the Channel A branch pointed out that the warrant judge should have considered the fairness of the investigation into the whistleblower Ji Mo and MBC, which reported based on Ji’s tip, both of whom were sued by the reporter.

The Channel A branch emphasized, “Before questioning the extensive evidence destruction, the court should have examined whether the prosecution’s investigation into whistleblower Ji Mo and MBC, which reported based on Ji’s tip, was conducted fairly,” adding, “The prosecution requested the arrest warrant for this reporter based on one side’s claim, and only then belatedly summoned Ji for investigation. It can only be seen that investigative fairness was not maintained.”

They continued, “Above all, detaining a reporter on charges of ‘attempted coercion’ is an unprecedented act that severely damages the independence and freedom of the Korean press,” and stated, “We will continue to thoroughly hold accountable any infringements on press freedom.”

Kim Dong-hyun, the warrant judge in charge of the substantive review of former reporter Lee’s arrest warrant at the Seoul Central District Court, issued the warrant on the 17th for ‘attempted coercion’ and unusually provided detailed reasons for the issuance.

At that time, Judge Kim stated, “There is substantial evidence to suspect that the suspect attempted to threaten the victim by connecting with a high-ranking prosecutor to achieve a specific reporting objective,” adding, “Despite the seriousness of these allegations, the suspect and related parties extensively destroyed evidence, obstructing the investigation, and there is a high risk of continued evidence destruction.”

He further explained, “For the discovery of substantive truth and the restoration of trust between the media and the prosecution, detention of the suspect at this stage is deemed unavoidable,” as the reason for issuing the warrant.

In particular, Judge Kim’s mention of ‘connection with a high-ranking prosecutor’ when issuing the arrest warrant for former reporter Lee can be interpreted as implying that the prosecution’s suspicion of collusion with Prosecutor General Han Dong-hoon has been sufficiently substantiated, which has led to a prevailing reaction in the legal community that this is ‘unusual.’

Lee’s defense counsel, in a statement titled ‘Position on the Issuance of the Arrest Warrant for Reporter Lee Dong-jae’ released the previous day, pointed out, “The warrant does not specify a ‘collusion relationship’ with Prosecutor General Han, yet the warrant court publicly stated that there is ‘substantial evidence to suspect connection with a high-ranking prosecutor to threaten,’ which raises concerns regarding the ‘confidentiality of investigation and warrant review’ and the ‘principle of impartiality’ that judgments should be made within the scope requested by the prosecution.”

With the issuance of the arrest warrant for former reporter Lee, the results of the Prosecutorial Investigation Deliberation Committee (Investigation Deliberation Committee) scheduled for the 24th are expected to be significantly diminished in meaning.

Since the judicial institution, the court, has already stated through the warrant review that ‘the charges are substantiated and the matter is serious,’ it is widely anticipated that the committee members attending the deliberation will find it difficult to recommend ‘suspension of investigation’ or ‘non-prosecution’ for former reporter Lee or Prosecutor Han.

The issuance of the arrest warrant for former reporter Lee is also expected to intensify the prosecution’s pressure on Prosecutor Han, who has so far refused to appear for prosecution summons.

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