▲ Lawmakers Kim Seung-won, Kim Han-kyu, Park Sang-hyuk, and Lee Hae-sik of the Democratic Party of Korea's Criminal Procedure Act Amendment Task Force submit a partial amendment to the Criminal Procedure Act to the National Assembly's Bills Division on the 9th.
The Supreme Court has expressed its opinion that it is legally appropriate to maintain the current provisions of the Criminal Procedure Act regarding the 'direction' of prosecutors in the execution of arrest and search warrants, rather than changing it to 'entrustment.'
According to the legal community on the 13th, the National Court Administration of the Supreme Court recently submitted its review opinion to the National Assembly regarding the amendment to the Criminal Procedure Act proposed by Democratic Party of Korea lawmaker Kim Han-kyu.
The amendment includes a provision to change the term 'prosecutor's direction' to 'prosecutor's entrustment' in the existing clause stating that 'arrest warrants shall be executed by judicial police officers under the direction of a prosecutor.'
In response, the National Court Administration stated, "It is reasonable to view the direction of the execution of arrest warrants issued by the court by a prosecutor not as 'investigation direction,' but as 'execution direction of (warrant) trials' conducted by the court where the case is pending," adding, "It is legally appropriate to maintain the current provisions of the law."
The explanation is that since Article 460, Paragraph 1 of the Criminal Procedure Act designates the prosecutor as the agency for directing the execution of trials, the prosecutor should also be the entity responsible for directing the execution of arrest warrants, which is the execution of a warrant trial.
The court further pointed out, "The current interpretation of the law is that the issuance of an arrest warrant by the court where the case is pending is a type of trial, and therefore an ordinary appeal is possible. Deleting the prosecutor's authority to direct implies that it is not a trial," adding, "In this case, warrant trials would be excluded from the scope of appeals, so further review is needed on whether to accept the reduction of the defendant's means of objection."
Regarding the amendment to change the 'prosecutor's direction' to 'prosecutor's entrustment' for search and seizure warrants, the court also stated, "The execution of search and seizure warrants issued by the court where the case is pending is also the execution of a trial, just like arrest warrants," and added, "It is legally appropriate to maintain the current law, so 'further review' is required."
These contents are also included in the amendments to the Criminal Procedure Act proposed by Democratic Party of Korea lawmaker Kim Yong-min and Rebuilding Korea Party lawmaker Park Eun-jung.
Both bills contain provisions to abolish the prosecutor's investigative powers while maintaining only the right to request supplementary investigations, abolish the prosecutor's authority to direct investigations by special judicial police officers, and restrict the prosecutor's direct request for warrants.
Regarding this, the National Court Administration stated, "This is a matter concerning the adjustment of authority between investigative agencies, which should be decided through sufficient deliberation and review as a matter of legislative policy," while also noting, "Sufficient supplementary measures must be prepared to prevent side effects that may arise from institutional changes."
(Photo: Yonhap News)
※
Copying, redistribution, and unauthorized use in AI training are strictly prohibited.