[Stalled Investigations] ① Average Processing Time Reaches 312 Days... Victims Caught in 'Case Ping-Pong'

Prosecutors Can Request Supplementary Investigation, But Lack Enforcement
Police Face Staffing Shortages and Avoid Investigation Units
Victims Sometimes Asked to Collect Evidence Themselves
Attorneys Hired From the Police Stage, Driving Up Legal

Editor's NoteSince the adjustment of investigative authority between the prosecution and the police, criminal cases have been drifting for years amid a game of "case ping-pong." Victims are exhausted, often withdrawing complaints or being forced into settlements, while suspects are left in a state of uncertainty. Nevertheless, the government and the ruling party are pushing for the so-called "Four Prosecution Reform Bills," including the establishment of the Public Prosecution Office and the Central Investigation Agency, aiming to strip away even supplementary investigative powers. The dark side of prosecution reform-delays in case processing, gaps in responsible investigation, and the weakening of human rights safeguards-is surfacing everywhere. What kind of system can protect victims' rights and keep citizens safe from crime, while upholding the fundamental principle of separating investigation and indictment? Asia Economy examines the current state and limitations of prosecution reform and seeks the right direction for a criminal justice system that serves the public.

"I've even filed a request to avoid a particular investigator through the National Petition Portal." (Attorney A)

"When I filed an objection to a case, it bounced back and forth between the prosecution and the police so many times that my client became exhausted and decided to settle with the suspect." (Attorney B)

Since the adjustment of investigative authority between the prosecution and the police, victims of criminal cases have been suffering due to endless "case shuffling" between the two agencies. With the police granted the authority to close investigations and prosecutors' supervisory powers abolished, cases now drift between the police and the prosecution. Cases remain unresolved, never reaching a court verdict, and victims, worn out by the process, end up withdrawing their complaints or accusations.

According to the Supreme Prosecutors' Office on September 1, the average time required to process a criminal case-from initial police report, through requests for supplementary investigation, to the prosecution's final decision-has soared from 142.1 days in 2020 to 312.7 days last year. This is more than double the time compared to before the adjustment of investigative authority.

Cases Are "Reset," Time Is "Restarted"

Currently, if the police decide not to refer a criminal case for prosecution, the victim may file an objection, and the prosecutor can request supplementary investigation. However, the prosecutor's request is virtually non-binding, so it is common for police to simply shelve the case. If, during this process, a regular personnel reshuffle results in a new investigator being assigned, the investigation often starts over from the beginning, forcing victims to endure endless waiting. In reality, cases are frequently "reset," and the investigation process is repeated from scratch. Victims are left with no choice but to wait indefinitely for the police to process their case. In some instances, attorneys have had to plead with police investigators just to have the case reviewed by the prosecution and brought to a conclusion.

An attorney who previously served as a chief prosecutor said, "The first case I took on after opening my practice two years ago is still with the police. It's not even a complicated case, but the fact that it hasn't been resolved for over two years highlights the serious problems in our current criminal justice system. Both victims and suspects are unable to live normal lives due to the anxiety of being under investigation for years."

"Burden of Proof Falls on Victims"

The root cause of investigation delays lies in the fact that all cases not subject to direct prosecution investigation are now handled and closed by the police in the first instance. In other words, the police control both the beginning and end of the process. The adjustment of investigative authority has concentrated cases within the police, but no follow-up measures, such as increasing manpower, have been implemented. While the number of cases has skyrocketed, the resources for handling them remain limited, inevitably leading to a "bottleneck."

In the early days of the adjustment, police personnel were often reassigned to investigative departments. However, as the caseload surged, these departments quickly became undesirable postings. Due to the nature of investigative work, putting in more time does not reduce the workload-in fact, it only increases. Officers are overwhelmed, and complaints continue to pile up. This perception has become widespread within the police. One judicial police officer explained, "As the aversion to investigative work has become more serious, we now have to fill investigative teams with officers who have only two or three years of experience. Assigning cases to so-called 'veterans' with more than ten years of experience is as rare as picking stars from the sky."

There are even cases where victims are asked to collect evidence themselves. In effect, the burden of proof is being shifted onto the victims. As a result, victims are hiring attorneys from the police investigation stage. This practice has become so entrenched that even suspects now routinely retain attorneys at the police stage. Naturally, legal costs are rising. Another attorney noted, "The proportion of clients hiring attorneys at the police stage has become much higher than at the prosecution stage."

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