Choo Mi-ae and Yoon Seok-yeol Clash Over Disclosure of Prosecutor Disciplinary Committee Member List (Comprehensive)

Chu: "Disciplinary Committee's Democratic Process Hindered"
Yoon: "Public Hearing Needed to Guarantee Right to Recusal"

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

[Asia Economy Reporter Seongpil Cho] On the 9th, one day before the Disciplinary Committee for prosecutors was to be held, Justice Minister Chu Mi-ae and Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-yeol's sides clashed over the disclosure of the list of disciplinary committee members. Minister Chu's side pointed out that disclosing the list of committee members would "seriously hinder a democratic and fair process," while Prosecutor General Yoon's side countered that "the list must be disclosed to guarantee the right to file a challenge."

On the same day, the Ministry of Justice stated in a message sent to the press corps, "According to the Prosecutor Disciplinary Act, the State Public Officials Act, and the Public Officials Disciplinary Regulations, the list of disciplinary committee members is not to be disclosed to ensure the fairness of the committee's deliberations and resolutions, and there is also an obligation to maintain confidentiality."

They added, "Although the list of disciplinary committee members has never been disclosed even once, requesting prior disclosure and claiming that the committee would be invalid if the request is not accepted seriously disrupts the democratic and fair progress of the disciplinary committee."

Regarding the disciplinary committee scheduled for the next day, the Ministry also mentioned the protection of Prosecutor General Yoon's right to defense. They explained that the right to file a challenge by the accused in accordance with the law would be guaranteed. The Ministry of Justice stated, "Procedural rights and the right to defense, which no one has enjoyed in previous disciplinary procedures, such as allowing access to disciplinary records, will be maximally guaranteed."

They also refuted the claim that Minister Chu Mi-ae, as the person who requested the disciplinary action, should not convene the committee or notify the date. The Ministry said, "According to the regulation that the person who requested the disciplinary action cannot participate in the deliberation, the minister cannot be involved in the deliberation, but it is natural to proceed with procedural matters such as convening the meeting until a deputy is appointed."

Prosecutor General Yoon's side immediately rebutted the Ministry of Justice's claims. Lee Wan-gyu, Yoon's attorney, stated in a press release, "The relevant provision of the Public Officials Disciplinary Regulations prohibits disclosure to the public but does not mean that the accused subject to disciplinary action should not be informed." He also cited a past case where the Ministry of Government Legislation interpreted that the accused must receive the list of committee members to guarantee the right to file a challenge in personnel committee cases.

He further claimed, "Today at noon, the Deputy Prosecutor called and said, 'Access to disallowed records is permitted, but copying is not. Only one representative attorney can review, and photography is also prohibited,'" arguing that the right to defense is not being effectively guaranteed. Lee said, "Allowing only one attorney to come the day before the disciplinary committee and only to review the records does not help prepare a defense and is unrealistic, so we refused," criticizing it as "an inappropriate measure intended only to create a pretext for allowing access."

Yoon's side also pointed out that it is inappropriate for Minister Chu to perform duties as the chairperson of the disciplinary committee. Lee argued, "According to the interpretation of the Civil Procedure Act and the Criminal Procedure Act, if a judge has grounds for disqualification, they are naturally excluded from all procedures of the case and cannot set the hearing date," and "Therefore, the minister should also be interpreted as excluded from all procedural duties after requesting disciplinary action."

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