Prosecutors' Self-Established Investigation Review Committee Faces Growing 'Uselessness' Debate

First Prosecution Case Against Investigation Review Committee Recommendation Emerges
Legal Community Criticizes "Investigation Review Committee Has Lost Its Value"

Lee Jae-yong, Vice Chairman of Samsung Electronics, who is under prosecution investigation for allegations of unfair succession of management rights related to the merger of the former Samsung C&T and Cheil Industries, as well as accounting fraud allegations involving Samsung Biologics, is entering the courtroom to attend the warrant hearing held at the Seoul Central District Court in Seocho-gu, Seoul on the 8th. Photo by Kang Jin-hyung aymsdream@

[Asia Economy Reporter Ki-min Lee] The prosecution's decision to proceed with the indictment of Samsung Electronics Vice Chairman Lee Jae-yong has drawn criticism for undermining the investigative review committee system established by the prosecution itself.

On the 1st of this month, 68 days after the investigative review committee recommended suspension of investigation and non-prosecution, the Economic Crime Division of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office (Chief Prosecutor Lee Bok-hyun) indicted Vice Chairman Lee and others on charges including unfair trading and market manipulation under the Capital Markets Act, as well as breach of trust in business.

The investigative review committee was established in January 2018 by then Prosecutor General Moon Moo-il to resolve distrust in prosecution investigations.

Composed of between 150 and 250 experts from various fields, the committee had a chairman randomly selecting 15 experts to judge cases, which was regarded as relatively fair and free from external pressure. Because of this, the prosecution had accepted all eight cases reviewed and recommended by the committee in the past.

However, the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office's indictment of Vice Chairman Lee marks the first case contradicting the committee's recommendation for non-prosecution. Previously, on June 26, the committee had reviewed suspicions of Samsung's illegal merger and succession and recommended suspension of investigation and non-prosecution for Vice Chairman Lee.

Prior to Lee’s indictment, the recent raid on Chief Prosecutor Han Dong-hoon by the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office, despite the committee’s recommendation to halt the investigation, has been reexamined, leading to criticism of the prosecution and even calls questioning the usefulness of the investigative review committee.

The investigative review committee was created as part of prosecutorial reform to prevent politically influenced or situationally motivated prosecutions. If the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office, Korea’s largest prosecution office, continues to disregard the committee’s recommendations, the question arises as to which prosecution office will heed the committee’s advice in the future.

Regarding this, a professor at a university in Seoul said, "The investigative review committee was established as a self-reform measure to address criticism that the prosecution exercises unchecked power due to its exclusive right to prosecute," adding, "This indictment is a self-contradictory conclusion that goes against the purpose of establishing the investigative review committee."

A legal expert also pointed out, "The prosecution is reaching conclusions contrary to the committee’s recommendations even for corporate heads or incumbent chief prosecutors who have the capacity to exercise their right to self-defense. It will be even harder for ordinary citizens involved in cases to seek relief through the investigative review committee," and added, "The investigative review committee has lost its practical value."

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