Debate Shaken Within Ruling Coalition Over Abolishing Prosecutors' Supplementary Investigation Rights Following 'Jang Yun-gi Case'

Discussions on abolishing the "prosecutors' supplementary investigation rights" under the Criminal Procedure Act, the final piece of prosecution reform led by the Democratic Party, are in turmoil. With former Representative Jung Chung-rae, who is competing for party leadership, and former Prime Minister Kim Min-seok both raising their voices to abolish the supplementary investigation rights, the issue seemed poised to pass through the National Assembly smoothly. However, it has hit a sudden brake as details of the "high school girl murder suspect" Jang Yun-gi case continue to emerge. Concerns are growing over whether the amendment proposed by the ruling coalition contains any mechanisms to remedy or prevent situations where police investigations are poor or distorted.

As voices pointing out the side effects of abolishing supplementary investigation rights grew, hardliners within the broader ruling coalition fired back over the weekend. On July 9, pro-ruling party YouTuber Kim Eo-jun claimed, "There are several cases of this scale every year. Why is this being reported so much? They are swaying public opinion using the Jang Yun-gi case to argue that prosecutors' supplementary investigation rights should not be abolished." Gyeonggi Governor Choo Mi-ae emphasized on Facebook on July 11, "The destruction of evidence in the murder case involving a police executive's son is an issue of defects in the obligation to avoid conflicts of interest, not an issue of separating investigation and prosecution. Even if there is distrust and anxiety regarding the police having exclusive investigative authority, this cannot be used as an excuse to delay the reform of the prosecution, which has usurped the democratic constitutional order." Rebuilding Korea Party Representative Park Eun-jung said, "The more we argue for giving investigative power [to prosecutors], the more we become like Yoon Suk-yeol and Han Dong-hoon." Former Democratic Party Representative Choe Kang-wook put forward a logic that encourages the disclosure of facts of suspected crimes, saying, "If the police do not investigate, the prosecutor can just inform the media."

Their arguments can be summarized as follows: If a police investigation is insufficient, prosecutors can simply request a supplementary investigation from the police. Leaving supplementary investigation rights with prosecutors, as is currently the case, would break the grand principle of prosecution reform—the separation of investigation and prosecution—and provide a detour for prosecutors to direct police investigations again or revive direct investigations.

The core of the Democratic Party's Criminal Procedure Act Amendment Task Force (TF) proposal lies in blocking prosecutors' direct supplementary investigations and strengthening the procedure for requesting supplementary investigations from the police.

First, a new clause will be established requiring judicial police officers who receive a request for a supplementary investigation to execute it without delay and, in principle, notify the prosecutor of the results within one month. If there is a justifiable reason, the period can be extended once by up to one month. In urgent cases, such as those where the statute of limitations is imminent, if the prosecutor sets a separate period for the supplementary investigation, that period must be followed. Second, if the police fail to comply with a request for a supplementary investigation without a justifiable reason, the proposal allows for the replacement of the officer in charge, in addition to the existing measures of exclusion from duties and requests for disciplinary action. However, disciplinary action must go through the police's internal disciplinary committee. Third, if a criminal act by the investigating officer is suspected or if the officer is deemed inappropriate to handle the case, the prosecutor can notify and transfer the case to another investigative agency, such as the newly established Serious Crimes Investigation Agency. Fourth, accusers, victims, and legal representatives will be allowed to report unfair investigations to prosecutors. The prosecutor will then demand corrective action from the relevant investigative agency and notify the reporter of the progress. Fifth, the scope of objections against non-referral cases will be expanded from being centered on the accuser under current law to also include the complainant.

In summary, the proposal limits the period for supplementary investigations, introduces punitive measures when the police fail to comply with requests, opens a channel for victims to report unfair investigations, and expands the right of complainants to object. However, there are questions that must be asked: Under this plan, will criminal investigations really become faster than they are now? Will victim protection become tighter? And will there be sufficient checks and balances against the police, who will hold sway over investigations?

According to the office of Democratic Party Representative Hong Kee-won, about 1.1 million cases are referred to the prosecution annually. Among these, the prosecution conducts supplementary investigations for 45%, while prosecutors request the police to conduct supplementary investigations for 10%. When a supplementary investigation is requested, it takes an average of 53 days for the police to conduct the additional investigation and reply to the prosecution. If the police have to take on the 45% of cases that prosecutors currently investigate directly, this period will inevitably become longer. However, the Democratic Party's TF proposal actually shortens the notification deadline for the prosecution to one month. It is highly questionable whether this is feasible unless the police deploy significantly more personnel.

Crime scenes and evidence do not remain frozen in time. CCTV footage is deleted, phone records disappear, witnesses' memories fade, and suspects gain time to coordinate their stories. While separate periods can be set for cases where the statute of limitations is imminent, the statute of limitations is not the only issue. In cases where the timing of securing evidence is critical—such as sexual crimes, stalking, domestic violence, organized crime, and financial crimes—a delay of even a day or two can alter the course of the investigation. Representative Hong Kee-won stated, "I plan to sponsor a separate amendment to the Criminal Procedure Act that grants supplementary investigation rights to the prosecution for crimes against vulnerable groups such as sexual violence victims, children, adolescents, and the disabled, as well as livelihood crimes that harm many citizens like online fraud, and urgent cases like detention cases."

In the Jang Yun-gi case, criminal evidence such as cable ties was returned to his father, who is a police executive. Jang's home address and front door password were also disclosed to his father, and CCTV footage was buried without proper analysis. Kim Eo-jun said, "There are several cases of this scale every year, so why is this being reported so much?" However, the truth was revealed, even if belatedly, because of the prosecution's supplementary investigation and additional reporting by the media. This is certainly not something that should be said in front of the grieving family of the victim.

Recalling the 2022 "Busan Roundhouse Kick" case, the victim appealed from the beginning about the possibility of a sexual crime, but this was not sufficiently reflected in the initial investigation. Later, as the victim's clothing, DNA analysis, and the circumstances at the time of the incident were re-examined, the motive of a sexual crime became a key issue, leading to changes in the charges and sentencing. Because the initial judgment of an investigative agency is not always perfect, there must be a channel through which another agency can re-verify the victim's appeals.

The same goes for the 2019 "Gapyeong Valley Murder" case. This case was not classified as a meticulous murder case from the beginning. The true nature of the case was revealed only after re-tracing the circumstances of the death, insurance payout issues, and the relationships and movements of the suspects. If it had been finalized as a simple accident or unnatural death in the early stages, the victim's death might have been recorded under a completely different name.

Democratic Party Representative Lee So-young, a former lawyer, pointed out, "Looking at the amendment, prosecutors are completely removed from evidence law regulations, including the Criminal Procedure Act. This means prosecutors would have to decide whether to indict based solely on documents prepared and handed over by the police, without even seeing the suspect once. This goes against the spirit of the trial-centric system."

The starting point of prosecution reform was checking the power of the prosecution. In the past, the prosecution was a powerful institution holding both investigative and prosecutorial powers, repeatedly sparking controversies over selective investigations and selective indictments in political cases. The awareness of the need to control prosecutorial power remains valid. This must apply equally to the police, who will replace a significant portion of the prosecution's investigative authority.

The TF proposal allows for exclusion from duties, replacement, and requests for disciplinary action if the police fail to comply with a request for a supplementary investigation without a justifiable reason. However, these procedures must go through the police's internal disciplinary committee. This will cause more time to pass, and the possibility of light punishment or protecting their own remains. Furthermore, while the proposal allows for cases to be transferred to other investigative agencies, such as the newly established Serious Crimes Investigation Agency, if the investigating officer is suspected of a crime or deemed inappropriate to handle the case, this is also an exceptional measure. It is insufficient to address routine poor investigations, misunderstandings of legal principles, omission of victim statements, and failure to reinforce evidence.

The cause championed by hardliners and reformers within the ruling coalition regarding the abolition of supplementary investigation rights has converged on prosecution reform. The appeal to eliminate even supplementary investigation rights because the prosecution cannot be trusted may be politically distinct. However, systems cannot be designed based on emotion alone.

A prime example is former Representative Jung Chung-rae's remark, "If we leave even a spoon, they will turn it into a knife and point it at the regime." The distrust toward the prosecution is understandable. However, the criminal justice system is not a shield to protect a regime. The standard should not be whether the prosecution can point a knife at the regime, but how quickly and accurately the state can approach the truth and protect human rights when citizens fall victim to crimes.

The attitude of former Prime Minister Kim Min-seok is also hard to shield from criticism. Although he operated the Prosecution Reform Promotion Team under the Prime Minister's Office for over eight months, he failed to produce a conclusion and stepped back, saying he would follow the National Assembly's decision. Attorney Park Chan-woon, who served as the advisory committee chairman for the Prosecution Reform Promotion Team, criticized, "Shouldn't they confidently submit a bill, strive for its passage in the National Assembly, and even exercise veto power if a bill that goes against the public interest is passed?" calling it a "disappearance of responsible politics."

Prosecution reform is necessary. However, the purpose of reform should not stop at punishing the prosecution but must lie in better guaranteeing the rights of citizens. The criteria for how the National Assembly's Legislation and Judiciary Committee, which will put the final piece in place, handles supplementary investigation rights should also focus not on partisan interests, but on whether criminal investigations become faster, victims are better protected, and control over investigative agencies becomes more sophisticated.

※