Drug suspects once trembled — now they smile: joint investigation units face legal limbo

Concerns over the revised Code of Criminal Procedure — rewritten to align with the abolition of the Prosecution Service — surfaced at a presidential ministry briefing, with officials warning that joint investigation units may no longer be legally viable after October. As prosecutors are set to lose their investigative powers entirely, including supplementary investigation authority, the legal basis for operating joint task forces that pair prosecutors and police is expected to collapse.

According to legal and political circles Thursday, the revised Code of Criminal Procedure takes effect Oct. 2, with limited exceptions. The new law accompanies the dissolution of the Prosecution Service and the creation of the Serious Crime Investigation Agency and the Public Prosecution Service, and its core provision is the wholesale elimination of prosecutors' investigative powers, including supplementary investigation authority.

Legal and academic circles have continued to criticize the revision — driven by the ruling Democratic Party of Korea — as a rushed overhaul lacking adequate deliberation and substantive content. Those concerns were echoed Wednesday at the presidential briefing, where officials flagged the weakened legal footing for joint investigative task forces after October.

Justice Minister Jeong Seong-ho told the second-half 2026 ministry briefing that "the legal basis for operating joint investigation units is extremely fragile." When President Lee Jae Myung asked whether prosecutors could still act on the principle that anything not explicitly prohibited is permitted, Jeong said that was not the case.

"If a prosecutor from the Public Prosecution Service — who is barred from conducting investigations — participates in an investigation, questions arise over the admissibility of evidence," Jeong said. He went on to say that "if the limits on prosecutors' participation in joint task forces are unclear and not explicitly defined in investigative guidelines, problems could emerge during the prosecution stage." Once the criminal justice system is restructured in October, Public Prosecution Service prosecutors will be prohibited from conducting investigations altogether, leaving the legal foundation of joint task force operations in doubt.

According to the Supreme Prosecutors' Office, nine joint investigation units are currently operating nationwide: a financial and securities crime task force, a voice phishing task force, a virtual assets crime task force, a national fiscal crime joint investigation unit, a joint investigation team for uncovering the truth behind the Itaewon crowd crush, a government-wide drug crime task force, a task force on corruption involving ties between politics and religion, a joint investigation team on illegal pharmaceutical crimes, and a task force on uncovering violations of citizens' right to political participation.

Ahead of Wednesday's briefing, Jeong told a preliminary press session at the Gwacheon government complex in Gyeonggi Province that "the joint prosecutor-police drug task force is producing the biggest results," warning that "after October, evidence obtained by prosecutors can no longer be used in investigations — so the legal basis for the task force's activities and establishment must be put in place quickly." The government-wide drug crime task force, formed last November by bringing together specialist investigators from the Supreme Prosecutors' Office, the Korean National Police Agency, the Korea Coast Guard and the Korea Customs Service, indicted 235 people within six months of its launch, including members of eight organized crime groups.

Interior and Safety Minister Yun Ho-jung offered a different view at the briefing, suggesting that "rather than a prosecutor-police joint unit, what will likely emerge is a joint unit combining Public Prosecution Service prosecutors, Serious Crime Investigation Agency investigators and police." His argument was that joint task forces could be maintained if prosecutors limited their role to legal advice, warrant review and warrant applications rather than active investigation. Critics, however, have said such an arrangement would undermine the practical value of seconding Public Prosecution Service prosecutors to the units.

President Lee told the briefing that officials should "prepare as thoroughly as possible at the working level for every scenario the revised law allows, and remember that a system can be amended — so find a way." He added that "time does not seem to be on our side with the joint task forces — it would be better to have an alternative ready in advance."

The legal footing for special prosecutor investigations is also shakier under the new framework, since individual special prosecutor acts require special prosecutors to follow statutes governing prosecutors' powers and duties. The second comprehensive special prosecutor team (led by Special Prosecutor Kwon Chang-young), which is investigating remaining allegations after the three major special prosecutor probes into insurrection, Kim Keon Hee and the Marine Corps corporal case, launched last February and is set to wrap up its activities Aug. 23. A special prosecutor probe into the National Election Commission is also on the verge of launching after the relevant bill cleared a Cabinet meeting Tuesday. Legal circles have raised the question of whether seconding prosecutors to special prosecutor teams is inherently contradictory once prosecutors' investigative powers have been abolished.