Kim Osu "Opposes Mediation Proposal... Special Committee's 'Conclusion First, Discussion Later' Approach Lacks Procedural Legitimacy" (Comprehensive)

Gathering Internal Opinions of the Supreme Prosecutors' Office to Deliver to the National Assembly Judiciary Committee
Clause 4 of the Mediation Proposal and Exclusion of Election Crimes Are the Biggest Issues
Prosecutors Inside Say the Mediation Proposal Goes Beyond 'Minsu Wanbak' to 'Jeongsu Wanbak'

Prosecutor General Kim Oh-soo held a press conference on the 25th at the Supreme Prosecutors' Office in Seocho-gu, Seoul, and expressed his position regarding the prosecution reform mediation plan agreed upon by the ruling and opposition parties. Photo by Moon Ho-nam munonam@

[Asia Economy, Legal Affairs Specialist Reporter Choi Seok-jin, Reporter Heo Kyung-jun] Prosecutor General Kim Oh-soo expressed on the 25th that "the prosecution cannot agree with the mediation proposal and clearly opposes it" regarding the ruling and opposition parties' agreement on Speaker Park Byeong-seok's 'complete prosecution investigation rights removal' (Geomsu Wanbak) mediation proposal.

On the morning of the same day, Kim held a press conference at the press room of the Supreme Prosecutors' Office in Seocho-dong, Seoul, pointing out four problems with the mediation proposal.

Kim said, "Although I submitted my resignation last Friday in protest against the political circles' push for the Geomsu Wanbak bill, as Prosecutor General, I thought it was the duty of a responsible public official to speak regarding the situation where the Speaker of the National Assembly proposed a mediation plan on the Geomsu Wanbak bill and both ruling and opposition parties are accepting it."

He added, "The mediation proposal merely delays the implementation timing of the Geomsu Wanbak bill temporarily, so the prosecution cannot agree with the mediation proposal and clearly opposes it," and appealed, "As a final earnest plea, I sincerely ask the President and the members of the National Assembly to respect public opinion and stop the hasty processing of the bill."

He continued, "I request the formation of a special committee in the National Assembly where both ruling and opposition parties and related institutions can participate to broadly and properly discuss the entire criminal justice system, rather than a special committee that reaches conclusions in advance."

On the day, Kim pointed out ▲ that separating the prosecutor's investigative and prosecutorial powers and depriving investigative authority is potentially unconstitutional, ▲ that abolishing direct prosecution by the prosecution would significantly reduce the state's crime response capability, ▲ that prohibiting investigations beyond the unity and identity of crimes would cause irreparable harm to the public, and ▲ that the special committee concluding with the 'establishment of the Central Investigation Agency linked to Geomsu Wanbak' is unlikely to secure procedural legitimacy due to its 'conclusion first, discussion later' approach.

Kim explained, "I have repeatedly stated that separating the prosecutor's investigative and prosecutorial powers and depriving investigative authority is potentially unconstitutional," and added, "Separating investigative prosecutors and prosecutorial prosecutors could be interpreted as requiring prosecutorial prosecutors to decide on prosecution without ever seeing the faces of the parties involved or hearing their statements, judging solely based on investigation records."

Kim emphasized that if the prosecution loses investigative authority over six major crimes, including public officials and election crimes, crime response will weaken. Kim said, "If the prosecution is prohibited from investigating public officials and election crimes, the state's crime response capability against public official corruption and election offenders will significantly decrease, which the public would not want," and raised his voice, "Election crimes have a short statute of limitations of six months, and cases nearing the statute of limitations risk being poorly handled due to repeated supplementary investigation requests with the police."

He added, "If the prosecution's investigative authority is suddenly abolished around early September, just before or halfway through the statute of limitations for the upcoming presidential and local elections, considerable confusion is expected."

Furthermore, Kim pointed out problems with the mediation proposal that prohibits investigations beyond the unity and identity of crimes. Kim said, "There can be no objection to banning separate investigations," but expressed concern, "If only crimes with unity and identity can be investigated, depending on interpretation, it could result in being unable to investigate any additional crimes beyond the relevant crime."

He also said, "Investigations of the principal offender and accomplices differ because the suspects are different; additional victim investigations differ because the victims are different; false accusation and perjury investigations differ because the criminal facts differ, resulting in no unity or identity, and consequently, the ping-pong transfer of cases between prosecution and police delays case processing, causing irreparable harm to the public."

He criticized that the Geomsu Wanbak mediation proposal was derived without sufficient discussion in the National Assembly's Special Committee on Criminal Justice Reform, pointing out the reversed order of precedence. Kim said, "This special committee concludes with the establishment of the Central Investigation Agency linked to Geomsu Wanbak," emphasizing, "It is entirely different from the special committee proposed by the Supreme Prosecutors' Office, which suggested discussion first and conclusion later."

He added, "A special committee that decides on Geomsu Wanbak first and then sets the implementation timing diminishes its significance and is unlikely to secure sufficient procedural legitimacy," and expressed hope, "I expect these issues to be calmly discussed during the legislative process in the National Assembly and for a procedure to form public consensus."

Regarding suspicions within the prosecution that Kim might have agreed with Speaker Park's mediation proposal, Kim clarified, "I did not even hear the word 'mediation' during my meeting with Speaker Park."

The Supreme Prosecutors' Office plans to collect internal opinions on the problems embedded in the mediation proposal and deliver them to the National Assembly's Legislation and Judiciary Committee through the Ministry of Justice. Prosecutors' office staff worked over the weekend at the building analyzing the problems of Speaker Park's mediation proposal and organizing directions for amendments.

The prosecution sees the most problematic parts of the mediation proposal as Article 4, which prohibits investigations beyond the unity and identity of crimes, and the exclusion of election crimes from the prosecution's direct investigation targets.

If the bill passes according to the mediation proposal, the prosecution argues that during investigations of voice phishing or multi-level marketing fraud cases, the path to investigate the principal offender or accomplices or uncover additional damages will be blocked, inevitably causing harm to the public.

Also, excluding election crimes from the prosecution's direct investigation targets is expected to cause significant confusion given the short six-month statute of limitations for election cases.

Within the prosecution, there is a reaction that the deletion of the prosecution's investigative authority over 'public officials and election crimes' is unacceptable.

The prosecution believes that if the prosecution's investigative authority over election crimes disappears from September according to the mediation proposal, the police will have to handle all investigations, which raises concerns that crimes occurring during elections may not be properly investigated and may be buried. If election crimes previously investigated by both prosecution and police are investigated only by the police, the quality of investigations will inevitably decline.

Within the prosecution, regarding the mediation proposal agreed upon by the ruling and opposition parties, there is even a reaction saying, "It is not just 'Minsu Wanbak' (complete removal of investigation rights from the Democratic Party) but 'Jeongsu Wanbak' (complete removal of investigation rights from politicians) that completely strips investigation rights from politicians."

The impact of depriving the prosecution's investigative authority over public officials and election crimes is expected to be felt starting from the nationwide simultaneous local elections held on June 1. If the Geomsu Wanbak bill is processed this month according to the mediation proposal, the partial amendments to the Criminal Procedure Act and the Prosecutors' Office Act will take effect four months after promulgation. Accordingly, from September, the prosecution will no longer be able to directly investigate election crimes and will have to rely on police investigations to decide on prosecution.

Even if the prosecution investigates, it must hand over all cases to the police before September, so it may not conduct investigations itself. Under current law, the statute of limitations for election crimes is six months. On the front lines, cases must be handed over to the police during investigations, and there are reportedly skeptical views questioning the necessity of prosecution conducting investigations.

Deputy Chief Prosecutor A sharply criticized, "(The mediation proposal) is a collusion between the ruling and opposition parties," and said, "(If the mediation proposal passes) the prosecution will not be able to conduct investigations at all, so there is no need for the prosecution to have a sense of responsibility."

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