Lee Jeong-su, Head of Central District Prosecutors' Office, "Deeply Responsible for Fairness and Neutrality... Essential Functions of Prosecution Must Not Be Abolished" (Comprehensive)

[Image source=Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Kim Hyung-min] On the 26th, Lee Jung-soo, Chief Prosecutor of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office, emphasized regarding the mediation proposal of the 'Geomsu Wanbak' (Complete Removal of Prosecutorial Investigation Rights) bill presented by National Assembly Speaker Park Byeong-seok, "We must not move towards abolishing the essential functions of the prosecution."

Lee

the Chief Prosecutor stated at a briefing session held in the government building's briefing room that morning, "Although the prosecution did its best, it failed to meet the public's expectations. We were not free from controversies over fairness and neutrality, and we deeply feel responsible," expressing this view.

He said, "Following the abolition of investigation command, the reduction of the prosecution's scope for supplementary investigations and the phased abolition of direct investigations will regress the role of uncovering substantive truth and protecting human rights," adding, "If the prosecution as a pillar is insufficient, it should be supplemented more, but weakening this pillar will shake judicial justice."

He also urged, "Please reconsider the National Assembly's mediation proposal, which has caused great public concern," and added, "I earnestly ask the National Assembly, the representative body of the people, to carefully consider the will of the people."

The briefing session was attended by Chief Prosecutor Lee, First Deputy Chief Prosecutor Jeong Jin-woo, Second Deputy Chief Prosecutor Park Cheol-woo, Third Deputy Chief Prosecutor Jin Jae-sun, Fourth Deputy Chief Prosecutor Kim Tae-hoon, and Secretary General Yoon Jin-woong.

During the Q&A session, when asked whether frontline investigations are being hindered due to discussions on Geomsu Wanbak, Chief Prosecutor Lee responded, "Prosecutors are struggling. They are bewildered as the judicial system is changing overnight," and added, "Nevertheless, someone has to conduct investigations, and since there must be no gaps in work, we are doing our best."

When asked if prosecutors or deputy chief prosecutors intend to resign following the senior prosecutors, he said, "I would like to say that I am not attached to my position," but emphasized, "Still, I think we should do our best and fulfill our roles. I do not want to be a senior who is embarrassing to juniors."

Regarding controversies over the fairness of investigations by the Central District Prosecutors' Office, such as the Daejang-dong development suspicion and allegations related to Kim Geon-hee, spouse of President-elect Yoon Seok-youl, he explained, "I cannot comment on whether the controversies are appropriate or not as the investigations are ongoing, but we aim to ensure that anyone who reviews the investigation records later can do so with pride."

He also said, "Controversies over fairness and neutrality will continue, and we must have investigative capabilities that meet the public's demands," adding, "If so, I would like to ask whether legislation or discussions on these matters are taking place in the National Assembly. The mediation proposal does not include such content."

The Central District Prosecutors' Office pointed out the main contents of the mediation proposal one by one and explained the anticipated problems. First, they raised issues with Article 4 of the mediation proposal, which prohibits separate investigations. According to this clause, the prosecution is prohibited from conducting investigations that deviate from the unity and identity of the crime regarding cases transferred from the police. It prohibits separate investigations. The prosecution's right to request corrective measures and cases where the complainant raises objections must also be handled within the scope that does not violate the unity and identity of the case.

In response, the Central District Prosecutors' Office emphasized, "The concept of unity and identity should not be used as a legislative basis to prohibit all additional investigations beyond the purpose of banning separate investigations in the mediation proposal." They argued, "If all additional investigations are restricted, serious crimes that can be interpreted as allowing supplementary investigations when the police identify the main culprit under current regulations will be buried, causing serious problems in terms of investigation efficiency and promptness."

They continued, "Currently, even if the prosecution requests supplementary investigations, whether it is carried out depends on the police's goodwill. There is a possibility of infinite repetition of the prosecution's supplementary investigation requests and the police's transfer or non-transfer, and there is no means to enforce compliance if there is a delay in police investigations."

"Strengthening the prosecution's supplementary investigations for cases transferred by the police acts as a check on police investigations and will function positively from the public's perspective," they added.

Regarding the provision in Article 1 of the mediation proposal that separates the prosecution's direct investigation rights and prosecution rights, they argued that it creates institutional imbalance with special prosecutors and the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials (CIO), and that separating investigation and prosecution functions within the Prosecutors' Office is a logical contradiction. They also stated, "Separating investigation and prosecution is to guarantee the fairness of investigations, but even if the investigating prosecutor is not allowed to file charges, preventing them from maintaining the prosecution has nothing to do with guaranteeing fairness and only hinders efficient crime response." They explained that there are practical limitations to dividing duties by separating investigation and prosecution rights within the Prosecutors' Office.

Additionally, the Central District Prosecutors' Office expressed concerns about investigation gaps and trial delays due to the deletion of election crimes and major disasters from the list of crimes where prosecutors can initiate investigations in the mediation proposal. They also argued that the phased abolition of direct prosecution could lead to the expansion and abuse of police authority.

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