Chairperson of the Anti-Corruption Commission, "Whistleblower" Protection Request to the Commission? "Not Yet"

"Retroactive Application Upon Confirmation of Public Interest Whistleblower by the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission"

Former Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-yeol. (Photo by Yonhap News)

[Sejong=Asia Economy Reporter Moon Chaeseok] Jeon Hyun-hee, Chairperson of the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission, stated on the 10th regarding the so-called 'accusation solicitation' allegations surrounding former Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-yeol, "If the Commission later determines that this informant qualifies as a whistleblower and initiates protective measures, those who exposed the informant's identity will all be subject to criminal punishment."

Chairperson Jeon appeared on MBC Radio that day and mentioned the Whistleblower Protection Act, saying, "There are very strict criminal penalties for violating this regulation. Since this part is likely to be triggered from the time of reporting to the Supreme Prosecutors' Office, everyone should be cautious."

She emphasized, "(The Whistleblower Protection Act) is a kind of retroactive application that protects the whistleblower from the moment the report is made."

When asked by the host whether "this person has not yet come to the Commission to apply for protective measures," Chairperson Jeon replied, "That is correct."

Earlier, the Supreme Prosecutors' Office stated, "We have received the whistleblower's report and confirmed that the requirements as a whistleblower under relevant laws have been met," but later the Commission clarified, "The institution that ultimately decides whether someone is a whistleblower is the Commission," which led to criticism of 'overstepping authority.'

Regarding this, Chairperson Jeon explained, "It cannot necessarily be seen that way," adding, "It can be interpreted that they confirmed to the media that they had started measures to protect the informant's confidentiality by considering the informant as a whistleblower during the internal investigation process."

On the fact that media reporting occurred before the whistleblowing, she said, "Even if the report is made to the reporting agency after informing the media, it can be regarded as whistleblowing according to procedures," but also noted, "However, if the content reported to the media and the content submitted to the reporting agency are identical and there is no other evidence, it may not be considered whistleblowing and the case could be closed."

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