Both entrances parallel… In the end, you have to be judged by the court
viewer
It is known that the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office has officially opposed the claim of’priority to prosecute prosecution cases’ by the high-ranking public officials criminal investigation office.
According to the law enforcement officials on the 5th, the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office recently forwarded a dissenting opinion to the airlift office in relation to the enactment of the rules for the affairs of the airlift. It is known that the enactment of the rules for the affairs of the Airborne Department contains the content that, if the Airborne Service transfers the prosecutor to the prosecutor’s office, the prosecutor only investigates, and the Airborne Service brings the case back to directly determine whether or not to be prosecuted.
The enactment bill clarified the grounds for the’referencing of public prosecution rights’ that recently emerged over the case of the illegal departure ban of Kim Hak-e’s former vice minister of the Ministry of Justice. When the Ministry of Public Affairs decided to hand over the case of former Vice Minister Kim to the prosecution, it demanded that the case be sent again after the investigation.
This is the first time that the Great Sword has made an official position on the government’s prosecution reservation department, but the opposition has already been predicted. In particular, inside the prosecution, there is a position that the prosecution does not need to follow that the airlift makes rules. As long as the case has been transferred, the prosecution can only exercise the authority to handle the case, such as investigation and prosecution, in accordance with the Prosecutors’ Office Act. When the Suwon District Prosecutor’s Office rejected the airlift’s request for resignation and charged the suspect in the former vice-minister Kim’s case on the 1st, the Supreme Swordsman Command didn’t make a difference.
It is expected that the final conclusion will be reached in the court without narrowing the positions of the great swordsman and the airlift. Depending on whether the court dismisses the prosecution, it is expected that the controversy over the interpretation of the mixed airlift law between the great swordsman and the airlifter will be judged. It is also up to the courts to decide whether the draft of the law enforcement regulations promoted by the airlift is in effect. The Constitutional Court judges whether a law is unconstitutional, but the Supreme Court has the final review authority on whether an order or rule is violated.
/ Reporter Son Gu-min [email protected]
< 저작권자 ⓒ 서울경제, 무단 전재 및 재배포 금지 >