Legal Community: "Self-Monitoring by the Corruption Investigation Office Causes Harm, Internal and External Oversight Bodies Needed"

Internal Opinion Gathering Amid Temple Controversy
Prosecutors to Form Reform Committee
External Parties Undervalue Self-Cleansing Efforts

[Image source=Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Kim Hyung-min] The High-ranking Officials' Crime Investigation Agency (HCIA) has begun internal consultations regarding current issues, including the ‘surveillance controversy.’ It plans to form a prosecutors' meeting soon to come up with reform measures. The prosecutors' meeting was originally scheduled for the 7th but was postponed due to a confirmed COVID-19 case.

The legal community downplays HCIA's self-purification efforts. A lawyer who is a former prosecutor pointed out, "They committed serious mistakes during the investigation process, but it seems they are trying to cover up the problems internally with just a level of opinion gathering." He added, "This is the harm of ‘self-monitoring’ occurring because there was no function to supervise and control HCIA from the start." The argument that internal and external supervisory bodies to control HCIA should be promptly established and strengthened is gaining traction.

Since its launch a year ago, HCIA did not have an external supervisory body by law, citing the need to conduct investigations independently and free from external pressure. There is procedural room for courts or prosecutors to control HCIA when it investigates and prosecutes. Courts review and issue warrants necessary for searches and arrests to check HCIA, and prosecutors exercise prosecution rights by receiving cases from HCIA. However, considering the cases HCIA has been investigating recently, many point out that this is still insufficient.

The power struggle between HCIA and the prosecution has not yet been resolved, and there have been cases where courts issued warrants and then revoked them. The search and seizure related to Rep. Kim Woong of the People Power Party regarding the ‘accusation manipulation’ suspicion was previously canceled, and the day before, prosecutors from the former Suwon District Prosecutors' Office investigation team filed a quasi-appeal with the court, requesting the minimization of the search and seizure they underwent concerning the ‘leak of the indictment by Seoul High Prosecutor Lee Seong-yoon,’ claiming it was illegal.

There is no proper supervisory function within HCIA either. Although there is a disciplinary committee chaired by the deputy chief to discipline affiliated prosecutors, it has the limitation of being a ‘self-discipline’ system, and the human rights inspector position has been vacant since February last year. HCIA said it went through the recruitment process three times but could not find a suitable candidate. Prosecutor Cha Jeong-hyun (Judicial Research and Training Institute class 36) is currently serving in a support role. Without a human rights inspector, the inspection committee has not been formed. The human rights inspector has been recruited since October last year and is expected to be appointed by next month at the latest. Externally, the prosecution has started investigating the case in which Prosecutor Kim filed a complaint against the HCIA chief. The charges are ‘media surveillance’ and ‘biased investigation.’ If the prosecution conducts a rigorous investigation of the head of HCIA, it could also curb HCIA’s indiscriminate investigations.

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