Three major special prosecutor teams have been established, focusing on insurrection, Kim Geon-hee, and fallen Marines, followed by a second comprehensive special prosecutor and an Election Commission special prosecutor. While the events and scales differ, the fundamental structure of gathering people, conducting investigations, and disclosing information remains similar. This article examines the rules governing special prosecutor investigations based on legal frameworks and cases that emerged during their establishment.
Are investigations properly recorded and whistleblowers protected?
After the investigation by the Kim Geon-hee special prosecutor team, there is no video recording of the interrogation of a Yangpyeong County official who later died. The special prosecutor's team explained that the individual did not consent to the recording. Article 244-2 of the Criminal Procedure Law generally allows for video recording to be optional. This has made it difficult to compare the written records with the actual interrogation amid allegations of coercive investigation.
The National Human Rights Commission raised concerns about the coercion of specific statements. Unlike special prosecutors and their assistants, there are no explicit regulations for the application of human rights protection investigation rules to special investigators, highlighting a gap. Subsequently, police stated there was insufficient evidence to acknowledge coercive investigation and decided not to prosecute.
Whistleblowers have also faced risks. Kim Hyun-seok, an expert in military command and control equipment, provided information about the military's failure to use location reporting equipment to lawmakers and the insurrection special prosecutor, but was subjected to a search and seizure in July on charges of violating military secrets protection laws. He reportedly resigned due to concerns about potential harm to his company.
Lee Sang-hee, a lawyer at the Citizens' Coalition for Economic Justice's Whistleblower Support Center, argued at a press conference that Kim's report is legally protected and that there should be procedures for reducing criminal liability. The subsequent comprehensive special prosecutor team (led by Kwon Chang-young) also noted that the provisions for reducing sentences and protecting identities and livelihoods under Article 26 of the Comprehensive Special Prosecutor Law are separate. There is a need for procedures to manage whistleblower protection from the point of report receipt to the connection with protection agencies and succession after the investigation concludes.
Suspect statements used for career promotion raise concerns
In May, a special investigator from the comprehensive special prosecutor team posted a photo of their appointment letter and a signed suspect statement on social media, claiming it would enhance their expertise in criminal cases. The special prosecutor decided to impose a one-month suspension as a penalty.
Concerns about conflicts of interest led to a change in personnel. The comprehensive special prosecutor team transferred the investigation into allegations related to North Korean remittances, previously assigned to special prosecutor assistant Kwon Young-bin, to special prosecutor assistant Kim Chi-heon. While denying the allegations, they stated they would address concerns about fairness.
The preparation period for the laws establishing the insurrection, fallen Marines, and comprehensive special prosecutors is all within 20 days. During this time, the suitability of personnel, facilities, and records must be verified, along with potential conflicts of interest.
There have also been cases of leaking investigation information through police connections. The comprehensive special prosecutor team found that Lee Chang-yul from the National Police Agency's Criminal Information Division obtained investigation information from police officers assigned to the Kim Geon-hee special prosecutor and passed it to suspect Kim Seung-beom, after which evidence was deleted. However, this has not been confirmed as a guilty verdict.
The reason for redeploying personnel from previous special prosecutor teams is to ensure continuity and efficiency. However, the reasons for selection and past involvement in cases must be documented, and security standards should distinguish between personal contacts and official cooperation.
Concerns about conflicts of interest led to a change in personnel. The comprehensive special prosecutor team transferred the investigation into allegations related to North Korean remittances, previously assigned to special prosecutor assistant Kwon Young-bin, to special prosecutor assistant Kim Chi-heon. While denying the allegations, they stated they would address concerns about fairness.
The preparation period for the laws establishing the insurrection, fallen Marines, and comprehensive special prosecutors is all within 20 days. During this time, the suitability of personnel, facilities, and records must be verified, along with potential conflicts of interest.
There have also been cases of leaking investigation information through police connections. The comprehensive special prosecutor team found that Lee Chang-yul from the National Police Agency's Criminal Information Division obtained investigation information from police officers assigned to the Kim Geon-hee special prosecutor and passed it to suspect Kim Seung-beom, after which evidence was deleted. However, this has not been confirmed as a guilty verdict.
The reason for redeploying personnel from previous special prosecutor teams is to ensure continuity and efficiency. However, the reasons for selection and past involvement in cases must be documented, and security standards should distinguish between personal contacts and official cooperation.
Public disclosure decisions shift from 'confirmed' to 'under discussion'
On June 1, the comprehensive special prosecutor announced it would publicly disclose former President Yoon Suk-yeol's appearance and requested media coverage. When the defense team refuted this as an unconfirmed matter, the special prosecutor corrected the statement to indicate it was 'under discussion' and issued an apology.
Special prosecutor assistant Kim Ji-mi unexpectedly appeared on the YouTube channel 'Kim Eo-jun's Humble is Hard News Factory' in April, responding to questions about the summons of key suspects by saying, "You will soon see the scene you desire." Hong Won-sik, a professor at Dongduk Women's University, pointed out in an interview with Media Today that the content of such statements should be evaluated for their potential to mislead regarding the direction of the investigation.
On September 29, when a photo on the president's social media included the phrase 'Election Commission special prosecutor,' the reporting route became controversial. The Blue House explained it was a police report on security conditions following a recount delay, while the special prosecutor stated it was unaware of the document's circumstances. There has been no confirmation of a non-public investigation report.
Article 13 of the Election Commission Special Prosecutor Law mandates reporting on cases involving the president and the National Assembly, but Article 14 regarding briefings for the public is discretionary. There are no provisions for the frequency of disclosures or error correction procedures in this article. There is a need to apply review and correction standards to both official announcements and external appearances.
Special prosecutor assistant Kim Ji-mi unexpectedly appeared on the YouTube channel 'Kim Eo-jun's Humble is Hard News Factory' in April, responding to questions about the summons of key suspects by saying, "You will soon see the scene you desire." Hong Won-sik, a professor at Dongduk Women's University, pointed out in an interview with Media Today that the content of such statements should be evaluated for their potential to mislead regarding the direction of the investigation.
On September 29, when a photo on the president's social media included the phrase 'Election Commission special prosecutor,' the reporting route became controversial. The Blue House explained it was a police report on security conditions following a recount delay, while the special prosecutor stated it was unaware of the document's circumstances. There has been no confirmation of a non-public investigation report.
Article 13 of the Election Commission Special Prosecutor Law mandates reporting on cases involving the president and the National Assembly, but Article 14 regarding briefings for the public is discretionary. There are no provisions for the frequency of disclosures or error correction procedures in this article. There is a need to apply review and correction standards to both official announcements and external appearances.
Records and costs remain after the team departs
Kim Hyun-seok submitted materials after being interrogated for about four hours on August 22, the day before the comprehensive special prosecutor's conclusion. The records include written statements and video recordings. However, when asked about the investigation details during the final briefing, special prosecutor assistant Kim Jung-min replied that he had not received any reports. While it cannot be concluded that this information was omitted from the final judgment, the reporting and review process needs clarification.
The comprehensive special prosecutor team transferred 46 cases and 150 individuals to the National Investigation Headquarters. Follow-up agencies require not only records but also incomplete analyses and reasoning. Connecting handover documents with supplementary explanations from responsible parties can reduce the burden of repeatedly understanding the cases.
Article 18 of the Comprehensive Special Prosecutor Law requires reporting on expenditures and activities to the president. While the special prosecutor emphasized cost savings on office rent in Gwacheon, there is a difference between explaining savings and disclosing execution details.
Former Supreme Prosecutor's Office Deputy Chief Koo Bon-seon suggested in a column for the Kukmin Ilbo that a monitoring body involving citizens, legal, and accounting experts should participate in oversight and verification after the conclusion of investigations. The next special prosecutor law should include procedures to ensure accountability for not only the cases to be investigated but also for investigation records, whistleblower protection, and the disclosure of corrections and settlements.
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.