material photo” alt=”The proposal for the second phase of prosecution reform, which completely separates the prosecution’s investigation and prosecution, is being discussed in the political world. The proposal for the second phase of prosecution reform, which completely separates the prosecution’s investigation and prosecution, is being discussed in the political world. <한겨레> Material photo
There are voices of concern, mainly from the legal and academic circles, in the pace of the ruling party’s attempt to achieve a’complete separation of investigation and prosecution’ by establishing a serious crime investigation office (investigation office). Although we agree with the long-term direction of separating investigation and prosecution, this is because it is first necessary to settle a new high-ranking public officials criminal investigation office (Airborne Division) and coordination of prosecutors’ powers for prosecution reform. Some point out that speed battles without sufficient prior discussion can be politicized and call for headwinds. Lawyers and scholars interviewed on the 25th generally agreed to separate the investigation and prosecution. However, there were mixed evaluations for the sudden promotion of the establishment of the investigation office. Those who said that speed warfare was necessary was “the right time is when the people’s hopes are high”, but there were also many opinions that “it is time to focus on stabilizing the criminal justice system that has recently changed.” When the Investigation Office is established, the right of direct investigation of the six major crimes left by the prosecution (corruption, economy, public officials, elections, defense projects, and major disasters) is transferred to the Investigation Office. The prosecution is only responsible for filing and maintaining prosecution. In addition, the Democratic Party is planning to end legislation in June by initiating a related bill in March. Kim Han-gyu, former chairman of the Seoul Bar Association, said, “I agree with the purpose of the prosecution reform of the separation of investigation and prosecution.” All we have to do is admit the problems of the existing legislation.” Young-soo Jang, a professor at the Graduate School of Law at Korea University, said, “In a situation where the adjustment of the investigative power has not been established and the problems caused by the new system have not been confirmed, the establishment of a new investigative agency may seem irresponsibly beyond impatience.” He pointed out that the priority is to prepare checks against police and police investigations.” Concerns were raised over the conflict between the 1st stage of the prosecution reform (adjustment of the air defense and investigation powers) and the 2nd stage (the investigation office) and the absence of a control device for the investigation office. Attorney Gap-bae Kim, who served as the chairman of the Prosecutors’ Past Investigation Committee, said, “I doubt whether it will be effective to create an investigation office in the situation where the existing prosecution’s power of investigation has been refined by the establishment of an airlift and adjustment of the investigative power.” A lawyer from the prosecutor’s office said, “There seems to be a lack of worries about how each agency, such as the air defense agency, the investigation agency, the police, and the prosecution, can check each other and coordinate the case.” On the other hand, the urgent need to establish a new investigative agency explains that since the prosecution’s direct investigative power is transferred to the investigative office, there is no need to greatly shake the coordination of the existing investigative power, and it is possible to achieve checks and balances between agencies simply by dividing the investigative power into multiple institutions. . “The reason why the judicial justice was broken is because the prosecution has monopolized the right to investigate, prosecute, and request warrants,” said Seo Seo-hak, a professor at Kyung Hee University’s Law School. . Inside the prosecution, many point out the problem of retreating the ability to investigate anti-corruption. An official at the prosecution said, “If the investigation and prosecution are separated, the difficulty in responding to the trial and identifying the actual truth may increase,” and said, “The more serious crimes such as power-type corruption and economic crimes, the more accumulated investigative power is needed.” Some pointed out that the process of public debate should take precedence before the speed battle. Han Sang-hee, a professor at Konkuk University’s Law School, said, “If the investigation office is in the second stage of the prosecution reform, we have to explain to the public what problems were in the first stage, where the control of the airlift and the right to investigate, and why the second stage is necessary.” The installation seems to be the purpose. The discussion of closed reform cannot last long.” Professor Young-soo Jang also said, “It seems that it is not something to push with the feelings toward the prosecution,” and said, “As there is great public unrest, the speed needs to be adjusted.” By Ok Ki-won and Jang Ye-ji, staff reporter [email protected]