Democratic Party Leads Motion to Extend Second Independent Counsel; Police Arrest Powers at Center of Controversy

The National Assembly's Operation Committee held a plenary meeting on the morning of the 20th and passed the agenda for the 437th temporary session, led by the Democratic Party. The core of the decision was to confirm the schedule for submitting a bill to the plenary session that seeks to extend the investigation period of the second comprehensive independent counsel, which is set to end on the 24th, by an additional 30 days. Simultaneously, the revision to the Criminal Procedure Act, which would allow police to make emergency arrests without prior prosecutorial approval, has emerged as a new political and social flashpoint, predicting acute legislative conflict both inside and outside the National Assembly.

Background and Key Issues of the Second Independent Counsel Extension Bill

The bill was pursued on the judgment that securing additional time and manpower is inevitable for Prosecutor Kwon Chae-young and the second special counsel team to thoroughly investigate remaining suspicions. The Democratic Party introduced the comprehensive counsel to address the inadequacies of previous investigations conducted since the third independent counsel, but faced limitations in uncovering all allegations within the given timeframe. Consequently, the party placed the revision bill on the legislative agenda to extend the investigation period by one month and inject necessary personnel and budget.

To ensure the passage of this bill, Han Byeong-do, the Democratic Party's floor leader, stepped forward to strongly argue for its handling at the plenary session. He emphasized the legitimacy of passing the bill, urging that if the People Power Party responds by boycotting the plenary session, they must take responsibility, such as by forfeiting their salaries. The opposition's argument can be summarized as a massive waste of the national budget. The People Power Party criticized that since the launch of the Lee Jae-myung administration, a total of 6.4 billion won has been spent solely on office rent for the successive special counsel teams. The opposition argues that rather than continuing political investigations that consume enormous tax funds, measures to cut costs—such as utilizing vacant space within the Presidential Office—should be prioritized.

Clash of Judicial Systems Surrounding Criminal Procedure Act Revision

Separate from the special counsel extension, the revision to the Criminal Procedure Act regarding investigation authority is also facing severe difficulties. Under the current Article 200-3 of the Criminal Procedure Act, police must obtain prior approval from a prosecutor when making an emergency arrest of a suspect. However, the revision bill proposed by the Democratic Party seeks to delete this requirement for prior prosecutorial approval, significantly expanding the police's independent arrest powers.

This bill fundamentally disrupts the balance of power between the prosecution and the police, which are core to national investigative authority. Independent lawmaker Han Dong-hoon strongly criticized the bill on the 19th, characterizing it as "allowing unlimited emergency arrests by police without warrants." There are concerns that if the prior control mechanism by prosecutors is removed, the arbitrary detention powers of judicial agencies will become excessively swollen, increasing the potential for human rights violations against citizens. Conversely, supporters of the revision argue that it is an advanced judicial reform aimed at abolishing the prosecution's supplementary investigation rights, which have been exercised excessively, and fostering the police into a responsible independent investigation agency.

Legislative Reform Drive and Social Impact

The specific scale of the budget for the special counsel extension has also been confirmed. It is estimated that extending the investigation period of the second comprehensive counsel by one month and adding 20 personnel will require an additional 2.7 billion won in national budget. This amount encompasses not only simple labor costs but also the expansion of investigation infrastructure and operational expenses. Despite the massive budget injection, if the investigation results do not lead to substantive legal accountability, there is a risk that the project could be distorted into political populism rather than serving a pure legislative purpose.

Both the realization of judicial justice and the efficient allocation of limited national budgets must be satisfied simultaneously.

The revision to the Criminal Procedure Act is also a significant issue that directly affects the daily lives of ordinary citizens. While positive effects are expected, such as maintaining public safety through the swift suppression and investigation of criminal suspects, there are concerns about side effects, such as the wrongful arrest of innocent citizens if the principle of due process is undermined, making it difficult to reach a social consensus.

Prospects for Legislative Procedures and Political Schedule

The National Assembly plans to hold a plenary session on this day to force through the amendment to the Special Counsel Act. If the ruling party强行 pushes for a unilateral vote based on its majority seats, the bill is highly likely to pass before the investigation deadline on the 24th. If the opposition party physically obstructs the proceedings or takes legal action, such as filing a suit to invalidate the vote, political confusion is likely to be prolonged. There are also concerns about a vicious cycle where logic regarding responsible politics, such as demands for lawmakers to forfeit their salaries, hinders national governance.

The Criminal Procedure Act revision bill must undergo review by the Legislation and Judiciary Committee, making a speed battle unlikely as with the Special Counsel Act. However, given the sharp ideological confrontation between both sides, how to harmonize the rationale for judicial reform with substantive human rights safeguards will emerge as a key task for the National Assembly moving forward. Ultimately, both bills are set to serve as key political issues influencing voter sentiment in the next election, going beyond simple institutional adjustments.