Democratic Party Holds Policy General Meeting on 'Supplementary Investigation Rights' Amid Heated Debate

[Anchor]

As concerns grow over the potential abolition of the prosecution's supplementary investigation rights following the "Jang Yun-gi case," the Democratic Party held a policy general meeting to hear from experts. A heated debate ensued among the experts regarding whether these rights should be maintained or abolished.

Reporter Ha Jeongyeon reports.

[Reporter]

The Democratic Party's policy general meeting was held as a process to gather consensus within the party on the issue of abolishing the prosecution's supplementary investigation rights.

The meeting proceeded in a format of listening to and discussing opinions from experts in the legal, academic, and civic sectors, with the Democratic Party leadership promising to fully listen to diverse voices.

[Han Byung-do / Democratic Party Floor Leader: This is a forum for discussion to reaffirm the direction of the reforms we have been pursuing while completely dispelling even 1% of anxiety.]

For over two hours, experts engaged in a fierce debate over the fate of the supplementary investigation rights.

[Park Chan-woon / Professor at Hanyang University Law School (In favor of maintaining supplementary investigation rights): Abolishing supplementary investigation rights would be a reform that puts the handling of 99% of general criminal cases at risk.]

[Hwang Mun-gyu / Professor of Police Administration at Joongbu University (In favor of abolishing supplementary investigation rights): There is a high possibility that separate or targeted investigations will be revived by exploiting the anxious psychology of victims.]

Regarding the "Jang Yun-gi case," views were sharply divided, with some arguing that "it is a problem that can be solved through police reform," while others claimed that "it demonstrates the necessity of the prosecution's supplementary investigation rights."

[Kang Dong-pil / Lawyer (In favor of abolishing supplementary investigation rights): The emergency arrest made 11 hours into the Jang Yun-gi case is something only the South Korean police could have done. They did a good job.]

[Kim Gyu-hyun / Lawyer (In favor of maintaining supplementary investigation rights): In reality, public livelihood damages like the Jang Yun-gi case are being mass-produced. Why are we even doing this kind of reform? You said that investigations speak through records, but are there cable ties in the records?]

A war of words also broke out between the experts and Democratic Party lawmakers.

[Kim Nam-hee / Democratic Party Lawmaker (In favor of limited maintenance of supplementary investigation rights): Each case is a matter of life for the individuals involved, such as the bereaved family of Lee Chae-won, the victim of the Jang Yun-gi case.]

[Kang Dong-pil / Lawyer (In favor of abolishing supplementary investigation rights): If you keep the supplementary investigation rights, will prosecutors come out to the scene every single time to look for cable ties? They can't. They can't do it.]

Although the general meeting was held as a process to build public consensus on legislation through gathering expert opinions, only about 15 out of the 161 Democratic Party lawmakers remained until the end.

[Video Editing: Yu Mi-ra]
※ Please note: This article was translated by AI and may contain errors.