In the position of the long sentence of the Ministry of Justice… Prosecutors “Troubleshooting ahead of pressure”

On the 16th, three days after the investigation of the suspected illegal departure (withdrawal) of the former Vice Minister of Justice Kim Hak-eui of Suwon District Prosecutor’s Office (Prosecutor Lee Jeong-seop) The prosecution is protesting, saying, “It is an attempt to stop it.” At the time when forced investigations such as seizure and search are expected to begin in earnest, the Ministry of Justice has presented a conclusion in advance that it is intended to interfere with the investigation.

On the 16th, the Ministry of Justice issued a five-page’information statement’ and said, “The allegation that the Ministry of Justice’s emergency withdrawal measures were ignoring legal procedures or was illegal is due to misunderstandings and facts.” It was evaluated that it was unusual for Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-yeol to submit a statement to the Ministry of Justice on Saturday, a weekend, three days after the suspected illegal withdrawal of Kim was reassigned to Suwon District Prosecutors’ Office in Anyang.

The Ministry of Justice also took its position on the 13th and 14th. However, at this time, it was not the official position in the name of the Ministry of Justice, but the position of Lee Yong-gu, then head of the Justice Department of the Ministry of Justice (currently Vice Minister of Justice) and Kim Tae-hoon, then head of the Policy Planning Department of the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office (currently, the Prosecutor’s Office of the Ministry of Justice). At the time of the withdrawal of the former Vice Minister Kim, prosecutor Gyu-won Lee dispatched the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office to investigate the facts of the past history through the manager of the Supreme Prosecutor’s Office to push for an emergency withdrawal request under the name of the Supreme Swordsman. When the suspicion was reported, he took a stand. Deputy Minister Lee also tried to clarify when he was suspected of planning an illegal withdrawal for Kim.

Then, when Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-yeol reassigned the case to Suwon District Prosecutor’s Office on the evening of the 13th, the Ministry of Justice also came to the fore. Front-line prosecutors protested that it was a measure that could be perceived as an order of non-prosecution in the case that had just begun investigation. It could be interpreted as exerting pressure even on a warrant request for a forced investigation.

One prosecution officer said, “The court decides whether to issue a request for a seizure search and arrest warrant. If the Ministry of Justice comes to the fore, the court will have no choice but to bear a burden.” Another prosecution officer said, “Even if the investigation team is determined not to be left and right, it will be burdensome if the Ministry of Justice, who has the personnel authority, intervenes.”

Some pointed out that the logic that the Ministry of Justice put forward in its position is not right. The Ministry of Justice said, “The controversy over some of the procedures for emergency withdrawal of former Vice Minister Kim is only a secondary controversy in the light of the fact that the Minister of Justice has the authority to make (general) withdrawals ex officio under the Immigration Control Act.” The Ministry of Justice is based on the provisions of Article 4 (2) of the Immigration Control Act, “The Minister of Justice may prohibit the departure of the country by a fixed period of up to one month for a person deemed inappropriate for criminal investigation.” will be.

However, if the JoongAng Ilbo coverage is summarized, there should be a possibility of a criminal investigation even if the minister ex officio withdrawals for criminal investigation. In March 2019, the Ministry of Justice went through an internal meeting to review the withdrawal of the then-Minister Park Sang-hee, but it was not possible because it did not meet the requirements.

Although the procedure for withdrawal under the authority of the minister seemed simple at first glance, it was avoided in consideration of post-political burdens. The Ministry of Justice also said in a statement on the 16th, “Because it is not easy for the Minister to determine whether it is appropriate to leave the country for criminal investigations,” if requested by an investigative agency, the person concerned will be prohibited from leaving the country. That’s why he wrote.

In response, a senior prosecution officer said, “The Ministry of Justice is misleading the people.” There are a rather cumbersome A procedure (request for an investigation agency) and an easy B procedure (ex officio of the minister) to achieve a certain purpose (emergency withdrawal). He pointed out that it is a compulsory claim to “is it possible to count it with procedure B?” after committing illegality.

Reporter Jung Yujin [email protected]