Prosecutors: "The crime of 'died suddenly after being struck' will be covered up"

Prosecutors General: "Kumsu Wanbak Directly Denies Prosecutors' Investigation Authority Guaranteed by Constitution"
Prosecution Forms TF to Review Unconstitutionality of 'Kumsu Wanbak Bill'... Discusses Constitutional Litigation Measures

Lee Geun-su, Head of the Public Trial and Litigation Department at the Supreme Prosecutors' Office, is making a statement on June 21 at the press room of the Supreme Prosecutors' Office in Seocho-gu, Seoul, regarding 'Geomsu Wanbak' (Complete Removal of Prosecutors' Investigation Rights). Photo by Kang Jin-hyung aymsdream@

[Asia Economy Reporter Heo Kyung-jun] "Crimes like the 1987 torture death of the late martyr Park Jong-cheol, who 'died suddenly after being struck,' may be buried in the future."

On the 21st, senior prosecutors (chief prosecutors) at the Supreme Prosecutors' Office unanimously stated that the Democratic Party's proposed "bill to strip the prosecution's investigative authority" directly violates the Constitution. They argued that the bill outright denies the prosecutor's investigative authority, which the Constitution recognizes as a means to guarantee the basic rights of the people.

In response, the Supreme Prosecutors' Office has launched a task force (TF) to prepare countermeasures. Centered on the Public Trial and Litigation Department, the TF is reviewing the unconstitutionality of the bill. It is reported that they are discussing constitutional litigation measures in case the bill passes the National Assembly plenary session.

Lee Geun-soo, head of the Public Trial and Litigation Department, explained, "We believe the bill could undermine the protection of basic rights such as life, property, freedom, and safety, as well as the function of human rights advocacy. There are many possibilities that it violates Article 12, Paragraph 1 of the Constitution during the process of gathering opinions from various sectors and legislative procedures."

The Public Investigation Department, Public Trial and Litigation Department, and Forensic Science Department of the Supreme Prosecutors' Office held a briefing on the same day, pointing out the potential problems that could arise during investigations if the bill passes.

The prosecution stated that if the bill passes, election-related investigations subject to a very short statute of limitations (6 months) are likely to be handled inadequately. To process election cases within six months, prosecutors with high legal expertise and experience in maintaining prosecutions must take responsibility for the investigation and trial. However, if the bill is enacted, the prosecution's hands and feet will be tied, leading to the statute of limitations expiring or cases being handled poorly.

Crimes in the public domain such as national security, terrorism, elections, labor, and industrial accidents are considered representative areas of prosecution. Election law violations covering presidential, general, local, and various union elections, as well as cases involving large corporations' union-busting operations, illegal dispatch, and major accidents, have all gone through prosecution before being judged by the courts.

Moreover, the prosecution has raised its voice that, with the prosecutor's authority to direct investigations already abolished, stripping even the supplementary investigative authority leaves no way to verify whether suspects were subjected to police coercion or violations of due process.

In particular, the bill abolishes the prosecutor's authority to order autopsies, making it difficult to uncover the truth through supplementary investigations, as in the case of the late martyr Park Jong-cheol's torture death. For example, it would be impossible to even ask a suspect detained under the National Security Act for 20 days by the police whether they were subjected to coercive interrogation, making it difficult to investigate police brutality.

Additionally, the prosecution is concerned that gaps will emerge in scientific investigations such as video and document analysis, DNA and forensic chemistry analysis, digital forensics, and cyber investigations. Due to differences in scientific investigation equipment and techniques, many pieces of evidence not secured during police investigations are discovered through prosecution investigations, necessitating re-verification of police investigation results in cases where evidence was secured through scientific investigation.

Choi Seong-pil, head of the Supreme Prosecutors' Office Forensic Science Department, said, "If the bill is implemented without sufficient discussion and review, the truth will be buried, criminals will rejoice and laugh, and victims will suffer injustice and lose sleep."

The prosecution emphasized that if the bill passes, it will become difficult to punish witnesses who lie in court. Since judges and prosecutors will no longer be able to investigate perjury, the temptation to commit perjury will inevitably increase. In fact, the number of confirmed perjury cases by the prosecution during trials decreased from 889 in 2018, 575 in 2019, and 451 in 2020 to 352 after the adjustment of investigative authority between the prosecution and police in January last year.

Furthermore, concerns were raised that it will become impossible to conduct supplementary investigations to collect sentencing evidence or investigate masterminds revealed during trials, making the prosecution powerless against crimes.

Meanwhile, senior prosecutors nationwide demanded a responsible attitude from Prosecutor General Kim Oh-soo and senior officials after a nine-hour overnight discussion. The meeting was attended by 69 senior prosecutors from 40 offices.

They stated, "'The bill to strip the prosecution's investigative authority' is a 'law that neglects crime.' What is being stripped is not the prosecution's investigative authority but the people's basic rights, which will directly lead to the suffering of the people. To prevent the collapse of the criminal justice system, we urge the Prosecutor General and senior officials to once again show a responsible attitude."

In response, Prosecutor General Kim said, "Although I have not received detailed reports on the opinions of the senior prosecutors, I will carefully review and seriously consider the conclusions reached after long discussions."

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