Minister Choo Mi-ae, Will She Invoke the 'Investigation Control Right' Again... Attention on What Measures Will Be Taken Regarding the 'Judge Documents'

Possibility of Reassignment Order in 'Judge Information Collection Document' Case
Minister Chu and the Supreme Prosecutors' Office Differ on Seoul High Prosecutors' Office Assignment
Possibility of Excluding Deputy Prosecutor General Cho Nam-gwan, Acting Prosecutor General Yoon's Deputy, from Command Authority

Minister of Justice Choo Mi-ae attending the Cabinet meeting held at the Government Seoul Office in Jongno-gu, Seoul on the 1st./Photo by Hyunmin Kim kimhyun81@

[Asia Economy Reporter Choi Seok-jin] Amid a power struggle between the Ministry of Justice and the Supreme Prosecutors' Office over the investigative authority of the 'judge surveillance' allegations, there are expectations that Minister of Justice Choo Mi-ae will exercise her authority to reassign the case, which is currently assigned to the Seoul High Prosecutors' Office.

The judge surveillance allegation case is one of the main charges for which Minister Choo requested disciplinary action against Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-yeol. With the disciplinary committee for Prosecutor General Yoon scheduled to convene on the morning of the 10th, both sides appear to be disputing whether Yoon was involved in the case or if Minister Choo's move was an overreach.

On the 9th, there were forecasts within and outside the prosecution that Minister Choo would soon reassign the case related to the 'judge information collection document,' which was assigned to the Seoul High Prosecutors' Office the previous day under the direction of Deputy Prosecutor General Cho Nam-gwan, through investigative command authority.

Deputy Prosecutor General Cho assigned both the case related to Prosecutor General Yoon, which the Supreme Prosecutors' Office Inspection Department independently converted into an investigation, and the case requested for investigation by Minister Choo to the Seoul High Prosecutors' Office. Immediately after this action, the Ministry of Justice expressed regret and stated that it would "promptly take necessary measures."

The necessary measure is currently likely to be the exercise of investigative command authority. Depending on the situation, there is also speculation that Minister Choo could exclude Deputy Prosecutor General Cho, who is currently directing the investigation on behalf of Prosecutor General Yoon, from the investigative command.

However, if Minister Choo actually exercises investigative command authority, another controversy will inevitably arise.

All of Deputy Prosecutor General Cho's series of actions fall within the authority of the Prosecutor General. However, since Prosecutor General Yoon recused himself from directing this matter due to a conflict of interest, Deputy Prosecutor General Cho acted as the case assigner.

Regarding this, the Ministry of Justice argues that fairness cannot be expected from the Seoul High Prosecutors' Office, citing its previous forced prosecution of Deputy Prosecutor General Jeong Jin-ung of the Gwangju District Prosecutors' Office on charges of 'abuse of authority' against Chief Prosecutor Han Dong-hoon. However, this is viewed within the prosecution as somewhat of an overreaching argument.

On the other hand, Deputy Prosecutor General Cho assigned the case to the Seoul High Prosecutors' Office based on the judgment that fairness in the investigation could not be expected from the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office, which was involved in the search and seizure of the Supreme Prosecutors' Office Inspection Department's Investigation Information Division and was even suspected of providing call records related to Chief Prosecutor Han to the Ministry of Justice. Additionally, the Ministry of Justice did not approve the Supreme Prosecutors' Office's request to appoint a 'special prosecutor,' making this an unavoidable decision.

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