ED Safeguards for victims essential

Rep. Seo Young-kyo of the ruling Democratic Party of Korea speaks during a news conference held on Sunday at the National Assembly. Yonhap

Hardliners within the ruling Democratic Party of Korea (DPK) have made it clear that they have no intention of backing down from their plan to pass a bill stripping prosecutors of their authority to supervise police investigations in criminal cases.

Rep. Seo Young-kyo, chair of the National Assembly's Legislation and Judiciary Committee, dismissed the possibility of revising the bill, vowing to push it through without modification.

"Prosecutors should focus on indictment, while the police should devote themselves to investigations. The two sides must work together and strengthen their cooperation," Seo said during a news conference at the National Assembly on Sunday.

Seo and other DPK hardliners should slow their push for the amendment. They need to listen to concerns raised by opponents within their own party and work with them to devise stronger safeguards for victims.

The current bill leaves considerable room for police abuse of power. If enacted, the police would have sole authority over criminal investigations. They could delay investigations long after victims file complaints or decide not to refer cases to prosecutors, leaving victims with little recourse.

A recent defamation case involving former Channel A reporter Lee Dong-jae illustrates the dangers of removing prosecutorial oversight.

In 2022, Lee sued left-wing YouTuber Kim Ou-joon for defamation and spreading false information. After investigating the case, the police decided not to forward it to prosecutors, citing insufficient evidence. The following year, however, prosecutors requested a reinvestigation after learning of the police's decision. The police eventually referred the case to the prosecution.

In a ruling issued on July 14, the Seoul Northern District Court found Kim guilty and fined him 20 million won.

Lee welcomed the verdict, saying justice had been served. He credited prosecutors for requesting the reinvestigation and argued that prosecutors should retain their authority to oversee police investigations. Kim appealed the ruling the following day.

It took more than five years for the court to reach its verdict. The case illustrates how difficult it can be for victims to obtain justice when investigations are delayed or abandoned.

The brutal murder case in the southwestern city of Gwangju is another example of how victims can suffer when police powers go unchecked.

Calls are growing for the DPK to reconsider the amendment and allow prosecutors to retain at least limited supervisory authority over police investigations. However, hardliners within the party have largely ignored those concerns.

Seo said she and other DPK lawmakers are considering measures to protect victims. Under one proposal, victims could file an appeal if police investigations stall. Under another, complainants and victims would be notified when police decide not to refer a case to prosecutors.

These proposals, however, fall short of providing meaningful protection. What happens if the police still fail to act after an appeal? Simply notifying victims of the status of their cases does little to safeguard their rights. More concrete and effective protections are needed.

The proposed amendment to the Criminal Procedure Act has exposed divisions within the ruling party. Hardliners are seeking the complete elimination of prosecutors' supervisory authority over police investigations. Among the leading advocates are Seo, Gyeonggi Gov. Choo Mi-ae, and Cho Kuk, chairman of the minor opposition Rebuilding Korea Party.

Opponents warn that the bill could undermine victims' rights. If passed, the police would dominate criminal investigations, while prosecutors would be limited to deciding whether to indict suspects in cases referred by the police.

Critics have expressed concern that concentrating investigative authority in the hands of the police could lead to abuses of power and leave victims without adequate legal protection. Those concerns are no longer merely theoretical. Several recent cases, including the Gwangju murder case, suggest the risks are already becoming apparent.