KOR- Ruling party's stance seems to have shifted with growing 'caution'... cannot proceed with the initial draft
- Demonizing the prosecution to give the police a monopoly will cause serious harm to the public
- Even President Lee was worried, but the Democratic Party is only walking on eggshells around its hardline supporters
- Hong Ki-won's amendment is also insufficient... unequal for the general public
- Although the People Power Party is small in numbers, it will push through its stance through public relations
- Joining Jang Dong-hyeok's trip to Gwangju? It was to listen to voices on the ground
- Floor leadership avoiding Jang Dong-hyeok? Focusing on the special counsel instead of outdoor rallies
- Jang Dong-hyeok's position? The timing for discussion has already passed
- We should gather opinions within the floor and gradually move to a new stage
- Jang Dong-hyeok is also reasonable... even if left to him, he will consider the party's consensus
■ Broadcast: SBS Kim Tae-hyun's Political Show (FM 103.5 MHz 7:00 – 9:00)
■ Date: July 16, 2026 (Thursday)
■ Host: Attorney Kim Tae-hyun
■ Guest: Representative Cho Bae-sook of the People Power Party
[Host] Kim Tae-hyun: How does the People Power Party view the controversy over the abolition of supplementary investigation rights? We will speak with Representative Cho Bae-sook of the People Power Party, South Korea's first female prosecutor who also served as a judge. Hello, Representative.
[Interview] Cho Bae-sook: Hello. Thank you for welcoming me so warmly.
[Host] Kim Tae-hyun: Thank you for joining us. You have been a prosecutor, a judge, and a lawyer, right?
[Interview] Cho Bae-sook: Yes, I have gone through all three branches of the legal profession.
[Host] Kim Tae-hyun: You have a wealth of experience.
[Interview] Cho Bae-sook: Yes.
[Host] Kim Tae-hyun: So you probably understand the necessity of these supplementary investigation rights better than anyone else. First of all, what is the exact position of the People Power Party on this matter right now?
[Interview] Cho Bae-sook: We oppose the abolition. In other words, we support maintaining them.
[Host] Kim Tae-hyun: Maintaining them completely?
[Interview] Cho Bae-sook: Yes.
[Host] Kim Tae-hyun: But you have proposed a bill now, making the opposition to the abolition a party platform.
[Interview] Cho Bae-sook: Yes.
[Host] Kim Tae-hyun: However, you are currently boycotting the standing committees. How do you plan to handle this? You cannot just talk about it outside the parliament.
[Interview] Cho Bae-sook: The reason we cannot enter the standing committees right now is that the Democratic Party unilaterally formed the committee leadership. Our negotiations on the committee formation are not even finished yet, and if we enter the committees set up by the Democratic Party, it would mean recognizing their unilateral action. We absolutely cannot enter. We must negotiate the committee formation.
[Host] Kim Tae-hyun: But there is a bill proposed by the People Power Party, and there are bills proposed by the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party has several versions of the bill. All of these will be reviewed by the Legislation and Judiciary Committee, and you are a member of that committee. If you do not participate, you will lose the opportunity to review them, completely blocking the path to pushing through your arguments.
[Interview] Cho Bae-sook: But from what I see, the atmosphere within the Democratic Party also seems to be changing.
[Host] Kim Tae-hyun: Is that so?
[Interview] Cho Bae-sook: Yes. Previously, even those who were cautious about the abolition of supplementary investigation rights shifted to advocating for the complete abolition of supplementary investigation rights and arguing that the prosecution should never be given investigative powers, as the party convention approached and they competed to show their ideological clarity. However, looking at the atmosphere yesterday (July 15), it seems that cautious views are gaining significant ground.
[Host] Kim Tae-hyun: I am sure many such voices are emerging now.
[Interview] Cho Bae-sook: So, I think the Democratic Party will not be able to push forward as aggressively as they did initially.
[Host] Kim Tae-hyun: First, a very fundamental question. Why should the supplementary investigation rights not be abolished?
[Interview] Cho Bae-sook: It is to protect our citizens from crime. For instance, as revealed in the Jang Yun-gi case, it was originally a very serious crime, such as murder for the purpose of rape. However, it was referred to the prosecution as simple murder. Why was this revealed? It was revealed only because of the supplementary investigation rights. Therefore, we must punish criminals accurately. Those who commit serious crimes must be punished. Ultimately, this protects the public and the victims.
[Host] Kim Tae-hyun: Yes.
[Interview] Cho Bae-sook: What I fundamentally want to say here is that there is something called criminal justice. For a society to remain healthy, criminal justice must be properly established. Those who commit crimes must be strictly punished. However, the innocent must be protected, and the public must be protected from crime.
[Host] Kim Tae-hyun: Yes.
[Interview] Cho Bae-sook: But if this fails, and someone who clearly harmed me by committing a serious crime is not properly punished, how unfair and angry would that victim feel? If that happens, people will think, "The state organs are not doing their job," and resort to private retaliation. They will be tempted to believe that fists are closer than the law. Then it becomes a jungle. It becomes a war of all against all, the discipline of the state collapses, and would that person still have affection for the community? Would they have patriotism? Then the state collapses. Criminal justice is extremely important. That is why we cannot just carelessly change the judicial system because the prosecution was once called a servant of political power. They demonize the prosecution and argue that investigative and prosecutorial powers must be separated, so no investigative power should be given to them. But if that happens, the police will have a monopoly. How are we going to handle the negative consequences of that?
[Host] Kim Tae-hyun: The negative consequences of that would be no less severe. Representative, realistically, since the opposition party is so outnumbered, the fate of the bill ultimately depends on how the consensus is formed within the Democratic Party. However, the President thinks it is right to exceptionally allow and leave this. The Minister of Justice holds the same position. Jung Cheong-rae, who was the party leader at the time, calls for complete abolition. Former Secretary-General Kim Min-seok says abolition is the government's stance. Yet, during general meetings of lawmakers, various different opinions emerge within the Democratic Party, with some saying it should be exceptionally left in place. It is highly diverse. What do you think is the essence of this chaotic debate over the abolition of supplementary investigation rights within the Democratic Party?
[Interview] Cho Bae-sook: It is because the attempt to abolish supplementary investigation rights is fundamentally wrong. Both legal professionals and the general public know as a matter of common sense that when a single institution monopolizes power, the negative consequences are immense. There must be checks and balances. For example, both the prosecution and the police must prevent crime, but they also need to protect the human rights of suspects so that no innocent person suffers. Therefore, institutions performing such crucial tasks must not be monopolized by a single entity. We need checks and balances at every corner, asking, "Shouldn't we look into this a bit more?" and listening to the victims.
[Host] Kim Tae-hyun: Yes.
[Interview] Cho Bae-sook: If we just leave it to one institution and tell the other "You can't do this," what does that lead to?
[Host] Kim Tae-hyun: What do you guess is the President's honest, inner thoughts on this matter?
[Interview] Cho Bae-sook: Didn't he mention it during the New Year's press conference? He said that supplementary investigation rights are exceptionally necessary. He said so himself.
[Host] Kim Tae-hyun: But why is the Democratic Party's movement going in a slightly different direction from the President's words?
[Interview] Cho Bae-sook:
[Host] Kim Tae-hyun: That is exactly what politics is. If things go slightly wrong, this is, in a way, a contradiction of political reality. In party politics, you have your supporters. So they look at what their supporters want, especially walking on eggshells around their hardline supporters. But in reality, the judgment or opinions of those people are not always right.
[Host] Kim Tae-hyun: That could be true. Currently, within the Democratic Party, an amendment led by Representative Hong Ki-won has been proposed, which exceptionally leaves or allows supplementary investigation rights under various exceptions. How do you evaluate that amendment? Is it very different from the People Power Party's proposal?
[Interview] Cho Bae-sook: Yes, it is different. Representative Hong Ki-won's proposal suggests partially retaining it for cases involving socially vulnerable groups. But if the socially vulnerable need supplementary investigations, why shouldn't the general public? And from what we hear, there are many ordinary citizens crying tears of blood after falling victim to voice phishing or organized fraud. So, retaining supplementary investigation rights only for those deemed socially vulnerable...
[Host] Kim Tae-hyun: It is right to keep it entirely, correct?
[Interview] Cho Bae-sook: Exactly. This also violates the right to equality. The weight of suffering and the weight of unfairness cannot be compared. We cannot say one is less and another is more.
[Host] Kim Tae-hyun: But Representative, how will you push through the People Power Party's proposal? You are so outnumbered.
[Interview] Cho Bae-sook: No, I think like this. Even within the Democratic Party, there seems to be a fear that they won't be able to handle the realistic, immense side effects that will arise if it is abolished. In fact, voices from all walks of life are strongly calling against the abolition of supplementary investigation rights. Even pro-ruling party organizations like Minbyun (Lawyers for a Democratic Society) are raising serious concerns.
[Host] Kim Tae-hyun: Yes.
[Interview] Cho Bae-sook: Therefore, although we are small in numbers, through public relations and, most fundamentally, because our position and the position of the citizens opposing this on the fundamental question of what criminal justice should be are correct, I believe we will prevail.
[Host] Kim Tae-hyun: I see. Representative, let's touch upon a few intra-party issues. Recently, Party Leader Jang Dong-hyeok has been holding many outdoor rallies, including one in Gwangju. You attended that, right? Since you are the head of the Jeonbuk Provincial Party Committee.
[Interview] Cho Bae-sook: I went yesterday (July 15). As the only proportional representative from the Honam region and the head of the Jeonbuk Provincial Party Committee, I joined them.
[Host] Kim Tae-hyun: Since you are the only lawmaker from Honam, you went. However, the media's evaluation of Leader Jang's overall outdoor politics is not very favorable. Today's (July 16) Chosun Ilbo editorial criticized it heavily, and other articles are similar, asking why the party leader keeps wandering outside. How do you view this?
[Interview] Cho Bae-sook: But in politics, when you go to the field, there are those voices. Perhaps Leader Jang has the intention of listening to those voices on the ground and figuring out how to reflect them in politics. In that sense, I think it is part of traveling around the country to listen to opinions.
[Host] Kim Tae-hyun: But looking at today's (July 16) Dong-A Ilbo article, while Leader Jang is passionately calling for a re-election outdoors, there have been zero official spokesperson briefings related to it. There are also reports that active lawmakers are avoiding phone calls from Jang's side asking them to attend the outdoor rallies. The reaction from active lawmakers seems lukewarm, even though you had to go because of your Honam connection.
[Interview] Cho Bae-sook: Well, the scope of what people think about the re-election issue actually varies.
[Host] Kim Tae-hyun: That could be.
[Interview] Cho Bae-sook: Because it varies, I think we need to discuss opinions within the party to organize our stance.
[Host] Kim Tae-hyun: Yes.
[Interview] Cho Bae-sook: However, we currently have a parliamentary investigation special committee, and discussions on a special counsel for this are underway. To resolve this politically, the special committee must function properly, and the most important thing is the special counsel. The core point is that the special counsel must be someone recommended by our People Power Party. In fact, the floor leadership is focusing on that part.
[Host] Kim Tae-hyun: What do you think should be done about Leader Jang's position? It has been talked about for quite a while now, coming up almost every day since the local elections.
[Interview] Cho Bae-sook: If it were right after the local elections, it might be different, but a month has already passed. Moreover, with ongoing issues like the Olympic Park incident and the abolition of supplementary investigation rights, I feel we might have missed the timing to discuss such matters again.
[Host] Kim Tae-hyun: So he will continue?
[Interview] Cho Bae-sook: But at some point, this issue will need to be resolved. So, while gathering opinions within the floor leadership, we should reach an agreement rather than excluding anyone, and move on to a proper new stage. After all, the public does not like to see us in conflict over these things.
[Host] Kim Tae-hyun: What is your personal stance? There were reports that various discussions took place during a meeting of senior lawmakers with Floor Leader Jeong Jeom-sig recently.
[Interview] Cho Bae-sook: When we had discussions on Monday (July 13), it was about pending issues, nothing else.
[Host] Kim Tae-hyun: Is that so?
[Interview] Cho Bae-sook: We reported on how the negotiations on committee formation are going, and discussed the special counsel issue and the legislation being prepared regarding the abolition of supplementary investigation rights. We shared these pending issues with the senior lawmakers and discussed how to handle them. So we primarily discussed those matters.
[Host] Kim Tae-hyun: What is your position on Leader Jang's status?
[Interview] Cho Bae-sook: Shouldn't that be left to Leader Jang himself?
[Host] Kim Tae-hyun: Then if Leader Jang says, "I want to complete my term," will he continue until August of next year?
[Interview] Cho Bae-sook: While that is true, I believe he is a reasonable person.
[Host] Kim Tae-hyun: Meaning he will step down on his own?
[Interview] Cho Bae-sook: I wouldn't put it so bluntly. In my view, he will consider things like the consensus among lawmakers.
[Host] Kim Tae-hyun: Understood. We will wrap up here. That was Representative Cho Bae-sook of the People Power Party. Thank you.
[Interview] Cho Bae-sook: Thank you.
The copyright of this interview material belongs to SBS Radio.
When publishing the full text or quoting the interview, please specify the channel and the exact program name as follows.
[SBS Kim Tae-hyun's Political Show]
※ Please note: This article was translated by AI and may contain errors.
Video News
Video News
Video News