Ambiguous Grounds for Dismissal of Indictment Fuel Criticism Over Hasty Legislation

[Anchor]

The latest amendment to the Criminal Procedure Act has sparked intense controversy, separate from the abolition of supplementary investigative powers, by inserting two new grounds for dismissing indictments without determining guilt or innocence. As these grounds are vaguely defined, suspicions are growing that the provision may have been drafted with the trials of President Lee Jae-myung in mind.

Reporter Shin Yong-il has the details.

[Reporter]

The current Criminal Procedure Act allows for the court's exceptional ruling to dismiss an indictment, which ends a trial without determining guilt or innocence, to be carried out only under six clearly defined criteria, such as when the court lacks jurisdiction due to the death of the defendant or when the prosecutor's indictment procedure violated the law.

However, heavy criticism is mounting over the two newly added clauses in the amendment: "severe illegal investigation" and "significant deviation of prosecutorial discretion."

Legal professionals express concern that it is unclear who will determine and how to interpret terms such as "severe" or "significant," leaving the provisions wide open for abuse by parties involved in a case attempting to intentionally delay trials.

[Jung Seung-hwan / Professor, Korea University Law School: If the validity of the indictment itself continues to be contested (even before entering the merits of the case), trial delays are practically guaranteed. Even if the court dismisses the indictment, it does not necessarily mean the case is completely concluded.]

During the bill review process, opposing opinions were raised that the clauses violate the principle of legal clarity, raising the likelihood of trial delays and undermining legal stability as outcomes would vary depending on judicial interpretation.

The prevailing view within the legal community is that the prosecution's indictment authority is already being properly controlled under the current legal system through the warrant system, the dismissal of indictments, and the court's ex officio investigations during trial proceedings.

[Han Sang-hie / Professor, Konkuk University Law School: I think these are matters that can be sufficiently handled under current laws and judicial practices. It is somewhat questionable whether explicitly stipulating and adding them to the law provides any legal advantage.]

Consequently, some corners of the legal community criticize the legislation as hasty, aimed at establishing legal grounds related to the trials of President Lee Jae-myung.

[Cha Jin-ah / Professor, Korea University Law School: It serves as a basis to enable rulings for the dismissal of indictments regardless of the court instance in President Lee Jae-myung's case, and gives prosecutors a justification to state, 'Since it falls under the grounds for dismissal, we will withdraw the indictment.']

As the Criminal Procedure Act amendment moves through the legislative process, concerns are growing within the legal community that the hastily added grounds for indictment dismissal, pushed through without sufficient public discourse, will only breed confusion.

(Photo courtesy of Yang Hyun-chul | Video by Lee Seung-jin | Graphics by Jang Chae-woo)
※ Please note: This article was translated by AI and may contain errors.