Prosecution has crossed line in investigating Cho Kuk
Justice Minister Cho Kuk is embroiled in yet another controversy over a phone conversation he had with a prosecutor who was leading the search of Cho's home, Monday, in connection with the ongoing investigation into a scandal involving him and his family.
Conservative parties vowed to push for the removal of Cho, claiming he, as the prosecution's top supervisor, attempted to influence an ongoing investigation of which he is a key subject.
Apparently, it was inappropriate for Cho to talk with a prosecutor who was searching his home with a court warrant. Cho deserves blame for this. His behavior was open to misconstruction. But for better understanding of what happened at Cho's home that day, we first need to look at the context.
During an interpellation session, Thursday, after Rep. Joo Kwang-deok of the largest conservative Liberty Korea Party asked if he conversed with a prosecutor searching his home, Cho admitted that he had, via his wife's mobile phone. Cho said his wife called him first after being shocked by the surprise raid, conducted after Cho left for work. She and their two children were at home. Cho tried to calm her, and asked her to put anybody there on the phone. After the prosecutor answered, Cho told him he, as a husband, was worried about his wife's health, and asked the person to take care of her while on duty there. Nothing more. This is Cho's story.
The prosecution said otherwise. Media reports cited an unnamed prosecution source as saying Cho told the prosecutor repeatedly to hurry up the search, and the prosecutor felt he was being "pressured."
In fact, the search on Cho's home continued for up to 11 hours with the wife and two children inside. The prosecution explained it took an unusually long time to search Cho's house because of complaints from Cho's lawyer.
The prosecution's long search prompted uproar from Cho's supporters and the ruling Democratic Party of Korea, which even vowed to file a complaint against what it called the prosecution's "unfair and excessive" handling of Cho's case.
Indeed, the prosecution's handling of the scandal is quite controversial. For the past month, there have been massive media reports based on illegal insider information from the prosecution, pointing to possible corruption and ethical lapses of Cho and his family.
Many universities, schools and offices have been searched in connection with suspicions of admission fraud involving Cho's two children. His wife has been indicted of forging a document regarding this. A family-owned school foundation and a family-invested private equity fund being operated by Cho's distant relative are also under intensive scrutiny.
But the prosecution has so far failed to present any evidence showing Cho's direct involvement in any of the numerous suspicions. It is true that there is nothing "significant" that can hold Cho responsible at this point.
Given that Cho has been leading a drive to reform the prosecution in ways to limit prosecutors' power and cut their deep-rooted collusive ties to politicians and the media, it is understandable that Cho's supporters say the ongoing probe and media onslaught against him and his family is a political "witch-hunt." What is happening to Cho gives the impression that the prosecution is desperate to resist reform and turn the clock back.
Meanwhile, Rep. Joo, who raised the issue of Cho's telephone talks with an on-duty prosecutor, was a prosecutor before switching to politics.
Justice Minister Cho Kuk is embroiled in yet another controversy over a phone conversation he had with a prosecutor who was leading the search of Cho's home, Monday, in connection with the ongoing investigation into a scandal involving him and his family.
Conservative parties vowed to push for the removal of Cho, claiming he, as the prosecution's top supervisor, attempted to influence an ongoing investigation of which he is a key subject.
Apparently, it was inappropriate for Cho to talk with a prosecutor who was searching his home with a court warrant. Cho deserves blame for this. His behavior was open to misconstruction. But for better understanding of what happened at Cho's home that day, we first need to look at the context.
During an interpellation session, Thursday, after Rep. Joo Kwang-deok of the largest conservative Liberty Korea Party asked if he conversed with a prosecutor searching his home, Cho admitted that he had, via his wife's mobile phone. Cho said his wife called him first after being shocked by the surprise raid, conducted after Cho left for work. She and their two children were at home. Cho tried to calm her, and asked her to put anybody there on the phone. After the prosecutor answered, Cho told him he, as a husband, was worried about his wife's health, and asked the person to take care of her while on duty there. Nothing more. This is Cho's story.
The prosecution said otherwise. Media reports cited an unnamed prosecution source as saying Cho told the prosecutor repeatedly to hurry up the search, and the prosecutor felt he was being "pressured."
In fact, the search on Cho's home continued for up to 11 hours with the wife and two children inside. The prosecution explained it took an unusually long time to search Cho's house because of complaints from Cho's lawyer.
The prosecution's long search prompted uproar from Cho's supporters and the ruling Democratic Party of Korea, which even vowed to file a complaint against what it called the prosecution's "unfair and excessive" handling of Cho's case.
Indeed, the prosecution's handling of the scandal is quite controversial. For the past month, there have been massive media reports based on illegal insider information from the prosecution, pointing to possible corruption and ethical lapses of Cho and his family.
Many universities, schools and offices have been searched in connection with suspicions of admission fraud involving Cho's two children. His wife has been indicted of forging a document regarding this. A family-owned school foundation and a family-invested private equity fund being operated by Cho's distant relative are also under intensive scrutiny.
But the prosecution has so far failed to present any evidence showing Cho's direct involvement in any of the numerous suspicions. It is true that there is nothing "significant" that can hold Cho responsible at this point.
Given that Cho has been leading a drive to reform the prosecution in ways to limit prosecutors' power and cut their deep-rooted collusive ties to politicians and the media, it is understandable that Cho's supporters say the ongoing probe and media onslaught against him and his family is a political "witch-hunt." What is happening to Cho gives the impression that the prosecution is desperate to resist reform and turn the clock back.
Meanwhile, Rep. Joo, who raised the issue of Cho's telephone talks with an on-duty prosecutor, was a prosecutor before switching to politics.
![[ANALYSIS] Tesla, BYD's price cuts unnerve LGES, Samsung, SK](https://img.koreatimes.co.kr/upload/thumbnailV2/b1cf8ba68d474cb69352bfe7ea9d14f0.jpg/dims/resize/178/optimize)
![[INTERVIEW] How ATEEZ achieved worldwide success](https://img.koreatimes.co.kr/upload/thumbnailV2/c7723b56dde94eb4b260950d368fe8fb.jpg/dims/resize/178/optimize)
