How to attain prosecutorial reform
By Choi Sung-jin
Among countries liberated after World War II, South Korea is seen as almost the only nation that has gone on to attain both democracy and industrialization.
As with all “compressed growth,” however, Korea's rapid democratization had its dark sides. Nothing shows this better than the unhappy endings of South Korean presidents in modern history.
First President Syngman Rhee went to live in exile in Hawaii. Park Chung-hee was shot dead by his intelligence chief. Chun Doo-hwan and Roh Tae-woo were pardoned while in prison for treason. Roh Moo-hyun committed suicide. Lee Myung-bak and Park Geun-hye are now locked up in jail.
Kim Young-sam and Kim Dae-jung lived in relative peace as ex-presidents. However, both had to apologize to the nation during their service because of corruption scandals involving their children. Kim Young-sam's post-retirement life could not be very comfortable either, stigmatized as an incompetent leader who threw the nation into its worst financial crisis.
Broadly speaking, dictatorial rulers or generals-turned-presidents were ousted by popular revolts or assassination. In contrast, post-democratization leaders who took office after 1987 were punished by the law after leaving office. However, these ill-fated ex-presidents' sympathizers saw their prosecution as thinly veiled political vendettas by their successors. Brandishing the sword of revenge on behalf of new presidents were public prosecutors.
Seen differently, the prosecution itself is a double-edged sword. The user of that sword today could be its victim tomorrow. Dictators used the military, spy agency and police to silence dissidents. Since democratization, legitimately elected presidents made public prosecutors play that role. As a result, the nation's prosecution has become one of the most powerful globally, monopolizing the right to investigate and indict. To put it bluntly, the prosecution has become like a dog that bites its former masters after they lose power.
True, law enforcement should allow no exceptions whether the targets are powerful or not. Nor should the prosecution be a tool for politicians. The incumbent Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-youl is right in this regard, vowing “not to show loyalty to any person” and trying to “hunt the live power” instead of a dead one.
It is equally valid, however, that absolute power corrupts absolutely, and the prosecution needs an agency that can counterbalance and check it. The lack of such a system is why the prosecution has long been under fire for being exceptionally generous to wrongs committed by one of their own.
For example, the prosecution had been reluctant to punish a former vice justice minister who took bribes, including an alleged sex service, from a businessman. After dragging its feet for years, the prosecution recently demanded a light sentence only for the bribe-taking part, a slap on the wrist.
These are the same prosecutors who drove a former president to suicide while investigating corruption charges involving the one-time first family. Top prosecutor Yoon himself is not free from suspicions involving his wife's mother, either. Prosecutors often cite the old saying, “Everyone has a skeleton in the closet.” Currently, few, if any, can open up the closets of prosecutors.
While in office, prosecutors have the fate of a person under their thumb. After leaving there, the ex-prosecutors and judges enjoy the so-called “privileges of the former post,” lobbying the incumbents and becoming hotshot lawyers. U.S. President Donald Trump has complained about the “deep state,” including bureaucracy, military and other elite institutions with deep and long roots in the government that hold sway over the country's everyday operation.
I am not sure whether a similar group exists in this country. If the answer is positive, however, I guess the prosecution is closest to it. Under what they called the “principle of the same prosecutorial body,” juniors seldom act against their seniors' wishes and receive the latter's protection instead.
Little wonder many say Korea is the paradise of prosecutors.
It is also a small surprise then one of the Moon Jae-in administration's foremost goals is to weaken the prosecution's power by introducing some checks and balances to the institution. An absolute majority of people also support it, as they are sick and tired of the “selective justice” within the nation's law enforcement system, widely summed up in the cynical catchphrase, “guilty if you are moneyless, not guilty if you are moneyed.” Concretely, Moon tried to do this by establishing the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials (CIO), which includes prosecutors and judges in its targets.
President Moon's czar in prosecutorial reform is Justice Minister Choo Mi-ae, the former leader of the governing Democratic Party of Korea. Partly because of her underestimation of the prosecution and its leader Yoon and partly because of her political ambition, Choo made several blunders while hurrying to remove Yoon from his post.
The government and ruling party also deserve some criticism for railroading the related bill and violating democratic principles. They deprived political opponents of the right to veto the proposed agency's head, estranging even some of their liberal supporters in the process.
Of course, the ruling camp might have felt frustrated with too sluggish a tempo in reforming the prosecution due to tenacious, politicized opposition from the conservative People Power Party, right-wing media and the prosecution itself. However, it would have been far better had the government and ruling party made more attempts to persuade centrists, if not extreme rightists. In a democracy, means are as important as ends, if not more so.
Moon's attempts also came at an inopportune time when most Koreans are reeling under the prolonged pandemic and its dire economic consequences. Haste makes waste. There must be ways to attain desired results without looking pushy and one-sided. Moon and his administration need to make the pill less bitter to swallow for their political opponents and more reasonable for voters. It's time to take a step back before taking two steps forward.
Choi Sung-jin (choisj1955@naver.com) is a Korea Times columnist.