Prosecutors Granted 'Fact-Finding' Power, But Cannot Use It As Trial Evidence?

[Anchor]

A bill to amend the Criminal Procedure Act, which would abolish prosecutors' supplementary investigation powers, is scheduled to be submitted to a plenary session tomorrow (July 30) led by the pan-ruling parties. The amendment newly includes a provision called the "fact-finding right," which allows prosecutors to listen to related statements or receive materials. However, it stipulates that materials obtained this way cannot be used as evidence in court.

Reporter Ha Jeongyeon has the details.

[Reporter]

In the amendment to the Criminal Procedure Act, which is on the verge of legislation led by the pan-ruling parties, the word "prosecutor"—previously written as the subject in provisions stating "prosecutors shall investigate offenders, criminal facts, and evidence," as well as investigation-related provisions such as requests for suspect attendance and emergency arrests—has been collectively deleted.

This completely strips prosecutors of their investigative powers, including supplementary investigation powers.

A new explicit provision will also be established stating that "prosecutors are responsible for indicting and maintaining prosecutions, while the police are responsible for investigations."

In the case of arrest warrants, prosecutors' authority is restricted so that they can only request them upon application by the police.

Instead, the Democratic Party has revised a significant number of related provisions, claiming to make prosecutors' right to demand supplementary investigations more effective.

The existing provision stating that the police "shall promptly fulfill" a prosecutor's request for supplementary investigation was changed to set a "deadline" of "fulfillment within one month," and was modified to allow prosecutors to designate a higher investigative agency to make the request.

A "right to raise objections" was also created to allow complainants and others to take issue with police delays or illegal investigations, which the Democratic Party explained as a "victim protection measure."

Amid growing concerns that the "right to demand supplementary investigations" alone is insufficient to properly keep the police in check, the Democratic Party has also newly established prosecutors' "fact-finding right."

This allows prosecutors to listen to the opinions of persons involved in a case or receive related materials, but the catch is that a proviso was attached stating that it "cannot be used as evidence in court."

This means it can only serve as a reference when prosecutors decide whether to reinvestigate, holding no evidentiary value in itself.

[Seo Young-kyo / Chairperson of the Legislation and Judiciary Committee (Democratic Party Lawmaker): We must move toward a criminal justice system that more thickly protects the basic rights of the people, distributes authority, and clarifies responsibility.]

[Joo Jin-woo / People Power Party Lawmaker: (Prosecutors) have to hand cases over to other agencies even after clearly seeing the evidence. Will criminals just sit still during that time? If it is rushed through like this, I believe the damage will fall back on the public.]

Tomorrow, the Democratic Party is expected to submit the amendment to the National Assembly plenary session, while the People Power Party is expected to counter with an unlimited debate, or filibuster.

The Democratic Party is then expected to forcefully terminate it the day after tomorrow (July 31) and attempt to process it in the plenary session.

(Photo courtesy of Yonhap News - Note: Provided based on standard system format / Video reporting: Shin Dong-hwan, Kim Yong-woo | Video editing: Jeon Min-gyu | Design: Hwang Se-yeon)
※ Please note: This article was translated by AI and may contain errors.