Contradictions in Revised Criminal Procedure Act Signal Field Confusion

[Anchor]

 
The amendment to the Criminal Procedure Act passed by the National Assembly contains contradictory provisions that clash with existing articles and the broader legal system. With some 170 related laws and thousands of subordinate statutes requiring revision, experts warn that major confusion is inevitable.

Here is a report by reporter Jang Hun-gyeong.

[Reporter]

The core of the revised Criminal Procedure Act is the complete deprivation of prosecutors' investigative powers.

Consequently, prosecutors will no longer be able to request warrants unless requested by the police. The Supreme Prosecutors' Office pointed out that "the Constitution envisions prosecutors directly requesting warrants," raising concerns of unconstitutionality.

[Park Jung-nan / Professor, Yonsei University Law School: Since it is the authority to control coercive investigations, it is naturally deemed possible for prosecutors to directly request warrants, and depriving them of this is inappropriate.]

Furthermore, to bring a suspect forwarded by the police to trial, prosecutors will only be able to request warrants for detention, seizure, or search through the format of requesting supplementary investigations from the police.

However, the right to request the preservation of evidence during an investigation—which is also a type of investigative procedure—remains intact in the provisions.

Because the law was amended hastily, contradictions regarding investigative authority have arisen even within the revised Criminal Procedure Act.

[Jung Seung-hwan / Professor, Korea University Law School: There are powers necessary for prosecutors who hold the authority to indict. When you try to eliminate all of those, systematic contradictions occur.]

The revised law also abolishes prosecutors' investigative command authority over special judicial police officers handling narcotics, tax crimes, and economic crimes, restricting them to guidance and advice only.

Concerns are raised that prosecutors may practically lose the opportunity to correct errors or the burying of cases by special judicial police.

[Lee Chang-hyun / Professor, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies Law School: Without investigative power, what good is issuing requests for supplementary investigations 100 times? No matter what systems are created, they will not be that effective.]

As the amendment to the Criminal Procedure Act—which fundamentally changes the criminal justice system maintained for over 70 years—passes the National Assembly, about 170 related laws and some 1,000 subordinate statutes, such as Supreme Prosecutors' Office regulations and precedents, require massive overhauls.

With roughly two months remaining until the full implementation of the revised Criminal Procedure Act, widespread confusion in the criminal justice field seems unavoidable unless contradictions within the bill itself are resolved and related laws are properly amended.

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