A high incidence of witnesses committing suicide is evidence that something might be wrong in the way prosecutors carry out their investigations. Since last November, two witnesses have killed themselves each month following interrogations. This may be a signal that law enforcement authorities should study ways of preventing such tragedies.
Korea’s suicide rate is one of the highest in the world. Another record is the number of suicides by witnesses after undergoing interrogation with prosecutors.
A businessman, named a Park, killed himself while he was questioned regarding alleged embezzlement and money laundering by Chairman Seon Jong-koo of Himart, Korea’s leading home appliances franchise.
Prosecutors rule out any linkage of the suicides to abuse of human rights during questioning. The late Park, who had been a subcontractor to Himart, was reportedly in deep agony following the interrogation. He was allegedly pressed to confess that he bribed the chairman. A prosecutor purportedly told him that the prosecution would bring to light the bribery case “even in hell” or by calling in his son.
This year alone, four witnesses killed themselves. A businessman took his life in February following a prosecutor’s summons over his alleged link to irregularities of subcontractors for the Kori Nuclear Power Plant. The chairman of Ace Savings Bank and a high-ranking administrator of a university in Mokpo killed themselves in similar situations.
In 2009 even President Roh Moo-hyun committed suicide after returning home from the prosecution’s office.
It may be hasty to blame the prosecution. However, prosecutors must analyze the reasons behind the incidents and their frequency. They must question themselves whether they confuse a witness and a criminal suspect. The prosecution should not resort to unlawful and forcible methods during interrogation.
Like a criminal suspect, a witness should have the right to refuse to testify or to seek the presence of a lawyer during questioning.
No such rights for witnesses exist under the current criminal law. Probably, prosecutors are abusing the legal loophole. The prosecution has long coerced witnesses into providing testimonial evidence against criminal suspects in return for not indicting them.
A witness has legal rights to refuse summons. However, it is difficult to ignore the call because a summoned witness is often a de facto criminal suspect in Korea.
A witness might face personal agony for having to acknowledge bribing business associates with whom they have long acquainted themselves.
Witnesses are crucial to prosecutors in establishing crimes. However, the law should limit the number of time prosecutors can summon a witness.
The prosecution should change its confession-based indictment to an evidence-based one.
The suicides of witnesses should not discourage prosecutors from tracing crimes for social justice. However, investigators should not be arbitrary, forceful and inhumane in the course of questioning witnesses.
A public hearing is necessary to codify the rights of witnesses and limits of prosecutors in criminal law.