Im Eun-jung, head of the Gwangju Serious Crimes Investigation Agency, became the subject of the agency's first inspection just nine days after its establishment. Yoon Ho-jung, the Minister of the Interior and Safety, publicly criticized Im, suggesting she has mistaken the agency for a political entity rather than a law enforcement body, and ordered the inspection based on allegations of violating duties of decorum and political neutrality.
This late inspection raises concerns. Im's public criticisms have been ongoing for some time. For instance, she previously described the prosecutorial reform plan proposed by then-Minister of Justice Jeong Seong-ho as "blindfolding and pretending to see" and labeled prosecutor appointments as a "disaster." She also criticized high-ranking officials, including Bong Wook, then Chief of the Presidential Office's Civil Affairs Office, and Lee Jin-soo, then Deputy Minister of Justice, as the "five evildoers of prosecutorial reform." Such pointed political language directed at her own government agency is unprecedented.
Despite her remarks, no disciplinary action was taken against her. The only response from Minister Jeong was a written warning regarding potential doubts about her political neutrality and work fairness.
A more significant issue arises from the timing of the inspection. It was initiated only after Im publicly attacked the nominee for the chief of the Serious Crimes Investigation Agency, who was appointed by the president. The ruling party also distanced itself from Im, stating that questioning a superior's appointments is unreasonable.
If Im's actions compromised political neutrality, they should have been addressed earlier. If her previous criticisms were tolerated as a matter of principle, an explanation is needed as to why she became a "political official" upon criticizing the nominee.
Without such clarification, suspicions arise that she was used as a "speaker for prosecutorial reform" when convenient, only to have her microphone taken away when she became politically inconvenient.
These questions do not end with Im. Kim Seong-dong, head of the Public Prosecution Inspection Division, raised legal concerns about the investigation into the Prosecutorial Human Rights Respect Future Committee, suggesting it could infringe on prosecutorial independence. In response, Lee Jin-soo, acting Minister of Justice, deemed Kim's behavior "very inappropriate" and stated that further review was needed to determine if it warranted inspection.
While Im's public comments have long been met with warnings, the immediate mention of inspection for Kim's internal concerns raises questions about consistency.
Park Sang-yong, a prosecutor, faced even stricter scrutiny. The Supreme Prosecutors' Office included 21 posts he made on Facebook during work hours from March 16 to April 2 as additional grounds for disciplinary action, which included rebuttals to allegations of witness coercion and criticisms of moves to dismiss charges in the Lee Jae-myung case.
These three cases prompt unavoidable questions: "Why is inspection delayed for some and expedited for others, and why is every single post scrutinized for some?" In other words, what are the criteria for inspections and disciplinary actions?
Inspections should not serve as a political tool. The focus should be on what regulations were violated, not on who was criticized. The speed and intensity of inspections should not vary based on whether statements are favorable or unfavorable to the administration.
Moreover, it is crucial to remember that the strongest justification for abolishing the prosecution office and establishing the Public Prosecution and Serious Crimes Investigation Agency was to eliminate a "political prosecution." President Lee Jae-myung stated that the era of using the prosecution for political suppression and the elimination of political opponents has come to an end.
Thus, the new agencies must distance themselves from politics more than the previous prosecution. The barometer for this is inspection and discipline. If inspections continue to favor only "our side," the political prosecution will be replaced by a "political serious crimes investigation agency" and a "political public prosecution."
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.