[Anchor]

We recently brought you an exclusive report that the latest amendment to the Criminal Procedure Act includes the abolition of supplementary investigation powers along with new grounds for the dismissal of an indictment. Concerns are rising that the ambiguous wording of these newly added clauses will only cause confusion in trials, and some in the legal community are even pointing out whether this is hasty legislation rushed through with the president's trial in mind.

Here is a report by Shin Yong-il.


[Reporter]

The current Criminal Procedure Act limits the court's decision to dismiss an indictment—an exceptional ruling that terminates a trial without deciding on guilt or innocence—to six clear criteria, such as when the court lacks jurisdiction due to the death of the defendant or when the prosecutor's indictment procedure violates the law.

However, fierce criticism is mounting over two newly added clauses in the latest Criminal Procedure Act amendment: "investigation involving severe illegality" or "a significant deviation from prosecutorial discretionary power."

The legal community expresses concern that it is unclear who will determine and how to interpret standards like "severe" or "significant," leaving ample room for parties involved in cases to abuse them to intentionally delay trials.

[Jung Seung-hwan / Professor, Korea University Law School : (Even before entering the merits of the case) if the validity of the indictment itself is continuously contested, it is obvious that the lawsuit will be delayed. (Even if the court dismisses the indictment) does that mean the case is completely concluded? Not necessarily.]

During the bill review process, opposing opinions were also raised that it violates the principle of "clarity" in law, increasing the likelihood of trial delays and undermining legal stability as outcomes could vary depending on the bench's interpretation.

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

[Han Sang-hee / Professor, Konkuk University Law School : I think it is an issue that can be fully handled under current laws or court practices. It is somewhat questionable whether explicitly stipulating and adding this in the law offers any legal advantages.]

Because of this, some members of the legal community are even criticizing it as hasty legislation aimed at establishing a legal basis related to President Lee Jae-myung's trial.

[Cha Jin-ah / Professor, Korea University Law School : It acts as a basis allowing for a ruling to dismiss the indictment regardless of the instance in President Lee Jae-myung's case, and it gives (the prosecutor) the pretext to say, "Since it falls under the grounds for dismissal, I will withdraw the indictment."]

As the amendment to the Criminal Procedure Act passes through the National Assembly and takes effect, growing concerns are emerging from the legal community that chaos will ensue due to the grounds for dismissal of indictments that were hastily added without public debate.

(Photo: Yonhap News / Video by Yang Hyun-chul | Video Editing by Lee Seung-jin | Design by Jang Chae-woo)