Democratic Party's Criminal Procedure Act Reform: Abolition of Prosecutorial Supplementary Investigation Authority and Mandatory Police Investigations

Complete Abolition of Prosecutorial Supplementary Investigation Authority and Mandatory Police Investigations

The Democratic Party has recently introduced a party-authored amendment to the Criminal Procedure Act that calls for the complete abolition of the prosecution's direct supplementary investigation authority. Under the existing system, if a prosecutor reviewed case records transferred by the police and determined that evidence was insufficient, they could directly direct investigators to conduct a re-investigation. However, this revision aims to prohibit direct prosecutorial intervention in investigations and instead significantly strengthens the prosecution's authority to request supplementary investigations. It imposes a legal obligation ensuring that the police cannot refuse such requests from the prosecutor in charge of the indictment for any reason.

Investigation periods are also strictly limited. The police must complete investigations within one month of receiving a request for supplementary investigation from the prosecution. Even in unavoidable circumstances requiring more time, the amendment stipulates that the period cannot exceed a maximum of two months. This is intended to prevent the prosecution from indefinitely delaying cases or exercising excessive authority under the guise of direct investigation, while simultaneously holding the police heavily accountable for primary investigation responsibilities. This move is interpreted as an attempt to re-establish the balance of power between judicial institutions by clearly separating investigation and indictment powers.

Industrial Ripple Effects of Allowing Local Currency Performance-Based Pay

Alongside the overhaul of the criminal justice system, economic legislation directly impacting the labor market is also being pursued. The Democratic Party has introduced an amendment to the Labor Standards Act that allows companies to pay a portion of performance-based bonuses or incentives to workers with local currency instead of cash. The stated goal of this bill is to stimulate local consumption and revitalize stagnant local commercial districts. From a corporate perspective, there is an expected secondary effect of securing flexibility in fund management by using local currency instead of cash to pay wages.

However, there is fierce backlash from the labor sector. Labor groups argue that forcibly restricting cash—legal tender that workers can freely use at their preferred time and place—to specific currencies undermines the essence of wage payment. Critics point out that limiting the circulation of performance pay to specific regions significantly infringes upon workers' substantive economic choices. In response, the Democratic Party maintains its stance that this is an inevitable measure to alleviate corporate burdens and invigorate the local economy, suggesting that institutional improvements are needed to bridge the gap between the two sides.

Conflict with Current Legal System and Analysis of Pros and Cons

The proposed amendments to the Criminal Procedure Act and the Labor Standards Act have raised sharp disagreements across the legal and economic sectors. Regarding the criminal procedure reform, the ruling party emphasizes it as an essential institutional device to prevent the prosecution from abusing investigative powers using the privilege of holding indictment rights. Conversely, the opposition and some legal figures argue that this removes the last bastion for prosecutors to intervene directly to uncover the truth if the police's primary investigation results are insufficient. There are also concerns raised about whether the police have secured sufficient personnel and budget to handle the vast volume of additional investigation requests.

The local currency wage bill is also subject to heated debate. The opposition party in the National Assembly counters that if the intent of the bill is to revitalize the local economy, high-ranking public officials such as National Assembly members and the Presidential Office should first declare that they will receive their salaries in local vouchers. The Court Administration Office has also recently raised practical difficulties regarding the introduction of special investigators for the maintenance of public prosecutions by an independent counsel team. Clashes between the stability of judicial administration and new institutional experiments are being witnessed in various areas.

Legislative Process Outlook and Impact on the Macroeconomy and Market

For these bills to pass the plenary session of the National Assembly, they must undergo precise bill review by the standing committee and system and structure review by the Legislation and Judiciary Committee. As the issue of adjusting prosecutorial investigation powers is linked in the long term to the macro judicial policy direction of complete separation of police and prosecution investigation powers, expert public hearings and policy consultations between the ruling and opposition parties are expected to proceed during the bill passage process. During this process, discussions on securing budget to expand police investigation infrastructure are also anticipated.

The wage bill related to the labor market will also undergo hearings and public opinion gathering processes at the National Assembly Environment and Labor Committee. If passed, the volume of local currency issuance could increase rapidly, potentially exacerbating the fiscal burden on local governments. For companies, there will be an added legal obligation to clearly redefine the method of performance pay when drafting employment contracts. Continued in-depth analysis is required to determine what structural changes these fundamental institutional shifts surrounding investigation and labor systems will bring to the domestic economic environment and industrial ecosystem in the future.