Tomorrow's Suspension Hearing, Wednesday's Disciplinary Committee... A Week That Will Decide the Fate of Choo and Yoon Begins

Minister of Justice Choo Mi-ae (left) and Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-youl.
[Image source=Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Choi Seok-jin] A crucial week has begun that will determine the fate of Justice Minister Chu Mi-ae and Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-yeol, who are locked in an extreme conflict.

According to the legal community on the 29th, the Seoul Administrative Court’s Administrative Division 4 (Chief Judge Cho Mi-yeon), which was assigned the injunction suspension case filed by Prosecutor General Yoon, will hold a hearing on Yoon’s injunction suspension application starting at 11 a.m. on Monday (the 30th).

Lee Wan-gyu, a lawyer from Dongin Law Firm representing Prosecutor General Yoon, is expected to announce in the afternoon whether Yoon will personally attend the hearing.

Two days after the injunction suspension hearing, on Wednesday (the 2nd of next month), the disciplinary committee convened by Minister Chu to review Prosecutor General Yoon will be held.

It remains unclear whether the Ministry of Justice’s Inspection Committee will be held normally before the disciplinary committee convenes. Some external members of the Inspection Committee are reportedly holding negative views regarding Minister Chu’s disciplinary request against Prosecutor General Yoon, so if the Inspection Committee is held before the disciplinary committee, there is a possibility they may recommend that the disciplinary action against Yoon is unjust.

Although the Inspection Committee’s recommendations are not binding, if the Ministry of Justice’s Inspection Committee issues such a stance amid widespread negative public opinion inside and outside the prosecution regarding Minister Chu’s disciplinary request and suspension order, it could become a burden for Minister Chu and the disciplinary committee members. Earlier this month, Minister Chu abruptly amended regulations that had required mandatory consultation with the Inspection Committee on important inspection matters, making it optional.

It is widely expected that the disciplinary committee meeting on Wednesday will decide on a severe disciplinary action such as dismissal or removal against Prosecutor General Yoon. Minister Chu chairs the committee, and Ko Ki-young, the Deputy Minister of Justice appointed by Minister Chu, serves as an ex officio member. Additionally, the other five members?including two prosecutors nominated by the minister, lawyers appointed by the minister, law professors appointed by the minister, and individuals with extensive knowledge and experience appointed by the minister?were all selected by Minister Chu as disciplinary committee members, making it highly likely that Minister Chu’s intentions will be directly reflected in the outcome.

Attention is also focused on what conclusion the court will reach regarding the injunction suspension application before the disciplinary committee convenes, after hearing the positions of both Prosecutor General Yoon’s side and Minister Chu at the hearing two days prior.

The key issue is whether Minister Chu’s suspension order causes “irreparable harm” to Prosecutor General Yoon and whether there is an “urgent need to prevent such harm.”

In other words, the focus is not on whether Minister Chu’s disciplinary request and suspension order against Yoon were lawful, but whether Yoon, as Prosecutor General, suffers irreparable harm by being excluded from his duties until the conclusion of the suspension cancellation lawsuit, and whether it is necessary to suspend the effect of the suspension order until the lawsuit’s conclusion to prevent such harm.

Even if the court accepts Yoon’s injunction suspension application before a disciplinary decision such as dismissal is made, once the disciplinary action is decided and enforced, Yoon will have to file another injunction suspension application while challenging the validity of the disciplinary action itself.

Thus, the conclusion of this injunction suspension case will not be the court’s final judgment on Minister Chu’s actions, but it is significant as the first direct judicial ruling on the ongoing conflict between Minister Chu and Prosecutor General Yoon since their appointments.

So far, Minister Chu’s attacks against Prosecutor General Yoon have not achieved significant results.

In particular, although the “Channel A coercion attempt” case was early on defined as a “media-prosecution collusion” case and Yoon’s authority to direct the investigation was stripped, the Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Office investigation team indicted former Channel A reporter Lee Dong-jae without naming Prosecutor Han Dong-hoon as an accomplice, and months later, Han has yet to be indicted.

The then lead investigator (Jung Jin-woong, Deputy Chief Prosecutor of Gwangju District Prosecutors’ Office), who publicly declared that “sufficient evidence of media-prosecution collusion has already been secured,” was instead prosecuted for assaulting Prosecutor Han, causing injury. Cornered, Minister Chu criticized the indictment itself against Deputy Chief Prosecutor Jung at the Seoul High Prosecutors’ Office and took the reckless step of ordering an inspection of the indictment process while withholding Deputy Chief Prosecutor Jung’s suspension despite the “abuse of authority” charges.

Moreover, regarding the “special activity funds” controversy sparked by the “pocket money” remark in the National Assembly, members of the ruling and opposition parties’ Legislation and Judiciary Committees even conducted an on-site inspection of the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office’s special activity fund usage, but no illegalities by Prosecutor General Yoon were found. Instead, it was revealed that the Ministry of Justice deducted about 1 billion won from the special activity funds allocated to the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office before sending the remainder, causing difficulties. Recently, it was also disclosed that Shim Jae-cheol, Director of the Ministry of Justice’s Prosecution Bureau and a close aide to Minister Chu, distributed encouragement money, causing further controversy.

Additionally, in the investigation of Prosecutor General Yoon’s mother-in-law’s case, which resumed under Minister Chu’s directive, the investigation team under Seoul Central District Prosecutor Lee Sung-yoon indicted Yoon’s mother-in-law, but no evidence was found of Yoon’s interference or cover-up in the investigation, which Minister Chu sought to confirm.

In this series of conflicts between the two, Prosecutor General Yoon appears to have the upper hand so far. The fact that most active prosecutors, except some classified as the “Chu Mi-ae line” and senior officials at the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office, have opposed Minister Chu’s recent actions is also interpreted as a judgment that her offensive against Yoon has gone too far.

However, since several investigations and inspections related to Prosecutor General Yoon ordered by Minister Chu remain ongoing, if any misconduct by Yoon is confirmed in any of these, the situation could quickly reverse.

Because of this, the court’s decision on the injunction suspension application expected this week is anticipated to have a significant impact on the future fate of both individuals.

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