Supreme Prosecutors' Office: "Supplementary Investigation Authority Needed for Judicial Control; Full Case Referral Must Be Reintroduced"

▲ The Supreme Prosecutors' Office in Seocho-gu

The Supreme Prosecutors' Office (SPO) has effectively expressed its opposition to the proposed amendment to the Criminal Procedure Act, which centers on the abolition of the prosecution's authority to conduct supplementary investigations, stating that "sufficient review and deliberation procedures are necessary."

In a press release today (July 8), the SPO stated, "We received a request for an opinion on the Criminal Procedure Act amendment from the National Assembly and submitted our response through the Ministry of Justice yesterday," while disclosing the gist of its position.

Regarding the authority for supplementary investigations, the SPO first argued that it must be maintained, calling it "an important duty of prosecutors and a means of judicial control."

The SPO emphasized, "Supplementary investigations by prosecutors are conducted supplementarily to determine whether to indict cases that have been initiated and referred by judicial police officers," adding, "This does not contradict the purpose of 'separating investigation and prosecution' and is essential for maintaining a robust public prosecution."

It further pointed out, "Supplementary investigation is the fastest and most efficient means of judicial control to correct delays, errors, or omissions in judgment by judicial police officers," and warned, "If this is not recognized and we rely solely on requests for supplementary investigations, it will lead to a proliferation of innocent victims caught in the 'ping-pong' of cases between the prosecution and the police."

Regarding requests for supplementary investigations, the SPO stated, "If exceptions remain where requests for supplementary investigation by prosecutors do not have to be followed, it will become impossible to process cases when there is a conflict of opinion between the prosecution and the police," adding, "Measures must be established to ensure the effectiveness of supplementary investigation requests for practical judicial control."

The SPO also called for the reintroduction of the "full case referral system," which requires all cases investigated by the police to be transferred to the prosecution.

The SPO criticized the current system, stating, "The current case referral system grants broad 'authority to decide not to refer' to judicial police officers, creating a structure where the primary investigative agency effectively determines the necessity of indictment," and added, "This does not align with the basic purpose of the institutional reform, which was to separate investigation and prosecution to ensure mutual checks and balances."

It continued, "Indictment and non-indictment are not separate decisions but two sides of the same coin," and added, "A prosecutor, as an external quasi-judicial official, must control and evaluate the legality of all investigation results to decide whether to prosecute."

Furthermore, regarding the proposal to entrust decisions on whether to file public charges to a "Public Prosecution Deliberation Committee" composed of ordinary citizens, the SPO pointed out, "There is a structural problem of a mismatch between authority and responsibility, in that members of the Public Prosecution Deliberation Committee bear no legal responsibility for the maintenance of public prosecution or the results of trials."

(Photo: Yonhap News)

※