The 'Case No. 1' Worked on for 4 Months... Background of the Public Corruption Investigation Office's Decision to Prosecute?

PCC "Superintendent Jo obstructed rights and unduly influenced teacher appointments"... Superintendent Jo's side "Requests convening of the Prosecution Investigation Deliberation Committee"

Superintendent of Seoul Metropolitan Office of Education Cho Hee-yeon, who is suspected of unfair special recruitment of dismissed teachers, is appearing at the High-ranking Officials' Crime Investigation Department in Gwacheon, Gyeonggi Province on the 27th. / Gwacheon - Photo by Kang Jin-hyung aymsdream@

[Asia Economy Reporter Bae Kyunghwan] The High-ranking Officials' Crime Investigation Agency (HCIA) made the final decision on June 3 to indict Seoul Metropolitan Office of Education Superintendent Cho Hee-yeon over allegations of special recruitment. This decision is based on laws related to the appointment of educational public officials. The law states that "no one shall intentionally interfere with or unduly influence the examination or appointment of national public officials." The HCIA viewed that during the review of the special recruitment, Superintendent Cho abused his authority and exerted undue influence, prompted by the legal basis, demands from teacher organizations, and opinions from Seoul city council members.

According to the HCIA's indictment request, the core of the case lies in Superintendent Cho directing the special recruitment of five teachers affiliated with the Korean Teachers and Education Workers Union (KTU), who had been convicted by the Supreme Court and consequently retired. The Board of Audit and Inspection, which conducted the audit on the allegations, concluded that Superintendent Cho excluded the deputy superintendent who refused to follow his special recruitment orders from work and assigned his secretary chief, Mr. A, to handle the special recruitment tasks. It is also suspected that Superintendent Cho had Mr. A unfairly select the screening committee members and exposed the five special recruitment candidates to the committee members to ensure they received high scores.

The HCIA did not accept all of Superintendent Cho's claims. Cho argued that ▲ the special recruitment was reviewed based on opinions from teacher organizations and others, and the five candidates were not predetermined but hired based on fair evaluations by external screening committee members ▲ and that he approved the process alone to avoid burdening the officials in charge, as the education office staff had previously been investigated in past special recruitment cases. Superintendent Cho also submitted a statement denying the charges, asserting that he never instructed to preselect special recruitment candidates or forced the deputy superintendent to hold a personnel committee related to special recruitment. He detailed that he never influenced the appointment of screening committee members or pressured them to give high scores to specific individuals, nor did he exclude any managers or directors who opposed the special recruitment from their duties, thus denying the establishment of guilt.

Legal circles believe the HCIA's decision to indict was not difficult. This is because the basic materials, including audit data from the Board of Audit and Inspection that initially reported the case to the prosecution, were sufficient, and the HCIA concentrated its investigative efforts for about four months. The prosecution review committee, composed of legal experts, also legitimized the decision by voting in favor of indictment.

However, the case was not without controversy. Superintendent Cho's side claimed invalidity and requested a re-review, arguing that their lawyers were not allowed to participate in the prosecution review committee, but the HCIA rejected this.

In response, Superintendent Cho's side plans to submit additional statements to the prosecution, which holds the final authority to indict, and take further measures. Right after the HCIA's announcement, Superintendent Cho's side stated, "The prosecution will thoroughly review the investigation records and related evidence to correct the HCIA's erroneous judgment," adding, "Since our rights to participate and testify were blocked in the HCIA's prosecution review committee, we plan to request the convening of the prosecution's investigation review committee."

Going forward, the prosecution will receive the investigation materials from the HCIA and make the final decision on whether to indict Superintendent Cho. According to the HCIA Act, the HCIA can only investigate Superintendent Cho's case but does not have the authority to indict. The HCIA's authority to both investigate and indict is limited to cases involving "high-ranking public officials' crimes," such as those involving judges, prosecutors, and police officers of superintendent rank or higher.

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