By Lee Kyung-min
A recent reorganization of investigative prerogatives between police and the prosecution is only part of a power struggle between the two law enforcement agencies and failed to address measures to protect public interest, an advocacy group said Monday. In a major change to grant police more autonomy to rein in the prosecution, the Moon Jae-in administration unveiled plans to revise the current law. The change will allow police to open, lead and close investigations without the prosecution's supervision. The much-awaited measure redefines the relationship between the two as cooperative, not authoritative. The measure seeks to help police limit the prosecution in exercising authority and discretion to unrestrictedly intervene in investigations.
The People's Solidarity for Participatory Democracy issued a statement criticizing a lack of preventative measures against possible abuse of authority by the two investigative bodies. “More measures should be in place to rein in police, the power of which will increase greatly if the revision materializes,” it said. “The measure increases the need for the prompt setting up of an investigative body.” The establishment of the long-discussed body was introduced as a viable alternative to crack down on corruption of the highest-ranking government officials including judges, prosecutors, ministers, vice ministers and heads of municipalities, all of whom have long avoided accountability due to a prevalent sense of “protecting the elite establishment.”
The prosecution, the only law enforcement agency that can seek “justice” to indict such high-profile figures, has largely remained unresponsive, primarily due to pressure from the top. The long-condoned practice continued to draw criticism from the public at large that the country's criminal justice system was designed only to protect such individuals while seeking harsh punishment for regular people without the same financial means or deep connections.
The suspect questioning procedure should be clearly streamlined, the advocacy group added, to remove redundancies. “Police and prosecutors should clearly put the procedures in writing to ban the two separate agencies from questioning suspects twice each over the same suspicion. The law should also be revised to recognize statements made to the police and prosecution as equally admissible in court.”
Under the plan, the prosecution will no longer be allowed to give directives to the police, unlike now where police must seek constant supervision and approval of prosecutors in opening, conducting and closing investigations. Currently, the police upon concluding an investigation must refer it to the prosecution to seek a ruling on a course of action. This includes whether to file indictments or drop cases, even for the lowest-profile, clear-cut ones police say do not require “higher” judgment. Only prosecutors can decide whether to indict a suspect or seek an arrest warrant. The reorganization dictates that prosecutors intervene in only limited cases concerning suspected human rights abuses, or the abuse of investigative authority, in which the police must submit case files to prosecutors and comply with correction orders. Failure to do this will allow the prosecution to take over.