The launch of the Public Prosecution Office is less than 20 days away, yet discussions surrounding its organization and personnel have returned to square one. President Lee Jae-myung directed revisions and enhancements to the proposed structure of the office shortly after returning from a state visit to France on September 10. He deemed the name 'Judicial Control Department' for the organization reviewing non-prosecution cases as inappropriate and suggested that the proposed quota of 2,292 prosecutors is excessive. Following this directive, the ruling party is considering renaming it to 'Non-Prosecution Case Review Department' and reducing the number of prosecutors.
The Public Prosecution Office is set to open on October 2, marking a fundamental shift in the criminal justice system, including the complete separation of investigation and prosecution, the dismantling of the prosecution office, and the elimination of direct investigative powers. However, the current situation raises concerns. A committee to recommend candidates for the inaugural chief of the Public Prosecution Office has yet to be formed. Considering the National Assembly's confirmation hearing, it appears the office will launch without a leader. Additionally, the newly established Serious Crimes Investigation Agency lacks basic infrastructure, such as a building and investigative computer network.
More serious issues are emerging, particularly the legal gaps evident throughout the criminal justice system.
Prosecutor Ahn Mi-hyun, deputy chief prosecutor at the Daejeon District Prosecutors' Office, highlighted a significant concern. When a suspect is arrested by the police, they must be transferred to a prosecutor within a maximum of 10 days. The prosecutor then has a limited period (up to 20 days) to decide whether to file charges. Ahn shared past instances where the police's arrest led to wrongful detention, which was later rectified through supplementary investigations. However, the elimination of prosecutors' supplementary investigation authority has blocked their ability to directly investigate and correct police errors.
The same issue applies to wanted cases. When a suspect, previously sought by the prosecution, is apprehended by the police, the prosecution must decide on their custody within 48 hours. During the time it takes to request supplementary investigations and exchange records with the police, the suspect could be released. There are also concerns regarding detention locations. Ahn pointed out that if a suspect is moved to a police station's detention center for continued custody, citing the prosecutor's inability to investigate, it could raise legal issues.
The Criminal Procedure Act is not a political declaration. It is a procedural law that specifically regulates the rights of investigative bodies (police, Serious Crimes Investigation Agency), prosecutorial bodies (Public Prosecution Office), judicial bodies (courts), as well as the rights of suspects and victims. If this procedure is flawed, justice cannot be achieved. Delays in investigations could allow criminals to escape, while wrongfully detained individuals may remain imprisoned longer.
Yet, the current focus of the political arena is on the four-character name 'Judicial Control Department.' The goal of prosecutorial reform should not merely be to reduce the number of prosecutors. The aim must be to appropriately distribute the state's coercive investigative powers and create checks and balances to protect the 'fundamental rights of the people.'
What is needed now is a clear direction. With only a few weeks until the launch of the Public Prosecution Office, it is crucial not to give the impression that the organization and personnel are being hastily revised in response to the demands of a strong support base. The destination must be clearly defined: 'What kind of criminal justice system do the people need?'
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.