'Prosecutors' supplementary investigation power is a safety belt,' former bar leaders warn against ruling party's criminal procedure bill

Former heads of the Korean Bar Association and regional bar associations have voiced concern over a Democratic Party of Korea-led bill to amend the Criminal Procedure Act, saying "the supplementary investigation power is a safety belt."

The Council of Former Regional Bar Association Presidents — an advisory body of the Korean Bar Association — issued a statement Wednesday saying it was "convinced that discussions on reforming the criminal justice system must focus on the principles of protecting citizens' rights and uncovering judicial truth."

The group described itself as "a consultative body of mid-career lawyers active across the country, operating as an advisory organ of the Korean Bar Association under the Council of Former Regional Bar Association Presidents (chair: Jang Seong-geun)." Signatories included former Korean Bar Association presidents Ha Chang-woo, Kim Hyeon and Lee Jong-yeop; former Seoul Bar Association president Kim Han-gyu; and former Gyeonggi Northern Bar Association presidents Lee Gwang-bok, Lee Im-seong and Jeong Ji-ung. Also signing were former Incheon Bar Association presidents Lee Jong-rin and Lee Sang-no, and former Gyeonggi Central Bar Association presidents Jang Seong-geun, Lee Jeong-ho and Yun Yeong-seon.

Additional signatories included former Gangwon Province Bar Association president Jo Dong-yong; former North Chungcheong Province Bar Association presidents Sin Sung-hyeon, Lee Gwang-hyeong, Ryu Seong-ryong and Choe Seok-jin; former Daegu Bar Association presidents Seok Wang-gi, Lee Dam, Lee Chun-hui and Lee Seok-hwa; former Busan Bar Association president Hwang Ju-hwan; former Ulsan Bar Association presidents Kim Yong-ju and Lee Chang-rim; former South Gyeongsang Province Bar Association presidents Lee Tae-u and Hwang Seok-bo; former Gwangju Bar Association presidents No Gang-gyu, Jin Yong-tae and Jang Jeong-hui; former North Jeolla Province Bar Association presidents Kim Yeong, Hwang Seon-cheol and Hwang Gyu-pyo; and former Jeju Bar Association president Na In-su.

The group said "the criminal justice system must operate with the purpose of protecting citizens from becoming unjust victims of crime," adding that "the process of criminal investigation and prosecution must be carried out under the principle of checks and balances between police and prosecutors."

They said that "in the practical field of criminal cases, many cases arise where legal review and fact-checking are still needed even after a case is transferred to prosecutors," noting that "errors in charges and applicable statutes, unconfirmed co-conspirator relationships, missing evidence, and insufficient assessment of the scale of damage are common occurrences."

The group said "a prosecutor's supplementary investigation supplements the police's initial investigation after case transfer, corrects legal errors, and secures the appropriateness of indictment — it is not a system that denies police authority or capability," describing it as "a verification mechanism that minimizes harm to suspects and victims caused by shoddy or excessive investigation, and enhances the completeness of indictment by reviewing the record from scratch."

They then cited the so-called "Jang Yun-gi case" — in which allegations of shoddy and cover-up policing have recently been raised — and said supplementary investigation had led to the uncovering of additional criminal charges.

"The role that prosecutors' supplementary investigation plays in revealing the truth and saving wronged citizens is illustrated by the recent Jang Yun-gi case," they said, adding that "at the police investigation stage, the full picture of the case was at risk of being buried or even partially distorted due to insufficient circumstantial evidence."

They said that "after prosecutors conducted supplementary investigation following the case transfer, the situation was corrected through the securing of circumstantial evidence that had been missed in the initial investigation," and that "through the prosecutors' supplementary investigation, additional criminal charges were uncovered and the extent of the damage could be established."

"If the supplementary investigation function had been blocked, the truth of the case would have been buried and only the tears of the victims and their families would have remained," they said, calling the case "an example that proves supplementary investigation is a fine-meshed net that realizes judicial justice."

The group also said "the voices from the practical field of criminal cases are reflected in statistics," noting that "in a survey of Korean Bar Association members nationwide, an overwhelming majority said the prosecutors' supplementary investigation power should be retained," and that "the same was true in a survey of members of Minbyeon," a lawyers' group for democratic society. "Most practicing lawyers are emphasizing the need for supplementary investigation," they said.

"Prosecutors' direct investigations and self-initiated investigations can be restricted to any extent. However, abolishing even the prosecutors' supplementary investigation function — which corrects errors in transferred cases — requires careful consideration," they said, adding that "the criminal justice system belongs to the people. The prosecutors' supplementary investigation power is a powerful safety belt for citizens that prevents unjust harm and wrongful judgments that may occur at the investigation stage."

The Criminal Procedure Act amendment bill — centered on abolishing prosecutors' supplementary investigation power — passed the National Assembly Legislation and Judiciary Committee's first bill-review subcommittee Tuesday under Democratic Party leadership. The party plans to put the bill to a vote at the full Assembly plenary session scheduled for Thursday.