Floor Leader Han to Push for Criminal Procedure Act Revision This Week Amid Deutsche Motors Scandal

Interim Leader and Floor Leader Han Byeong-do of the Democratic Party of Korea declared on the 27th at a Supreme Council meeting held at the National Assembly that he would process a revision to the Criminal Procedure Act aimed at completely abolishing the prosecution’s authority for supplementary investigation during this week’s plenary session. Simultaneously, he decided to pursue a revision to the National Assembly Act to subject bills to a mandatory vote if a certain period elapses after the conclusion of debate, aiming to prevent filibusters by the minority opposition. With the plenary session scheduled for the 30th, follow-up procedures are proceeding rapidly at the Legislation and Judiciary Committee and the House Steering Committee levels.

Background of the Criminal Procedure Act and National Assembly Act Revisions

The core of this legislative initiative addresses the long-standing task of prosecution reform, centered on the monopoly of investigation and indictment powers. Under current law, if the prosecution issues a non-prosecution decision, it retains the authority to reject the police’s request for reinvestigation and conduct supplementary investigations on its own. The opposition party and civic groups have long criticized this system as a structurally fatal flaw that allows investigations into power-related corruption or specific figures to be suppressed at the prosecution's discretion. In particular, social suspicion regarding the prosecution's practice of concluding investigations has grown recently after the independent counsel team led by Kwak Chang-young conducted additional searches and seizures of the Ministry of Justice, the Supreme Prosecutors' Office, and the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office while investigating the background of non-prosecution decisions during the Deutsche Motors stock manipulation case.

This distrust has surfaced amid the prolonged legislative gridlock since the start of the 22nd National Assembly. The indefinite use of the filibuster, or the minority opposition’s tactic of disrupting sessions to halt proceedings, has significantly delayed the processing of key bills. Floor Leader Han has stated that he aims to pass the Criminal Procedure Act revision within this week and finalize the organization of bills related to fast-track procedures and the filibuster to restrict opposition debate, adding that the subcommittee review of the National Assembly Act will proceed concurrently.

Key Content and Scope of the Bills

The most contentious revision to the Criminal Procedure Act involves the complete deletion of the prosecution’s supplementary investigation authority. This effectively removes the legal basis for the prosecution to arbitrarily supplement evidence or conclude investigations at the stage of deciding whether to indict after a case is referred. Instead, the direction is to restructure the investigation system so that the police bear substantive responsibility for concluding cases. This legislative intent seeks to complete the previous adjustment of police investigative powers and substantially equalize the authority of the two investigative bodies. The revision applies to all criminal cases across all age groups, maintaining the framework of the prosecution's monopoly on indictment while designing the system to exclude prosecution intervention in principle during the pre-indictment investigation phase.

The revision to the National Assembly Act is also being promoted as a key measure to prevent delays in voting. The regulations are being clarified to allow the Speaker to put an agenda to a vote by exercising their authority if a certain grace period has passed after the conclusion of debate in the chamber. Sanctions against members who persist in disruptive speech are being detailed to prevent repeated delays in bill processing at the end of the session. Several fast-track bills discussed since late last year are expected to be forcibly processed within their deadlines following this institutional reform.

Political Interests and Sharp Debate

The ruling Democratic Party of Korea defines the passage of these bills as an essential task for the National Assembly. It is a strategy to solidify the support base of the previous administration by dispersing investigative power to prevent corruption in authoritative institutions. Conversely, the main opposition People Power Party and other conservative opposition forces are mounting a strong backlash. The opposition warns that abolishing the supplementary investigation authority will paralyze the prosecution’s investigative functions and make punishing serious crimes impossible. They argue that a police-led investigation system could lose objectivity if it falls under the influence of a specific administration.

In a briefing, an opposition spokesperson harshly criticized the move, stating, "Completely removing the prosecution's role as the final bulwark is an affront to judicial justice," and adding, "It amounts to creating another authoritarian body by concentrating excessive power in the police."

Opinions are also divided among civic groups. Progressive organizations like People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy agreed with the direction of the revision, stating that minimum institutional safeguards are needed to guarantee the independence of police investigative powers. However, some in the legal community urge a cautious approach, warning that the national investigation system could fall into chaos. There are practical concerns that expanding police investigative personnel and clarifying legal responsibilities in statute should precede the bill's passage to prevent a vacuum in justice.

Legislative Schedule and Political/Social Outlook

If the Criminal Procedure Act revision is forced through the plenary session scheduled for the 30th, the bill is expected to be officially promulgated and implemented after a grace period of within six months. The revision to the National Assembly Act is currently being coordinated in a subcommittee of the House Steering Committee and is likely to be resubmitted at next month’s regular session of the National Assembly, potentially reflecting additional revision demands from the opposition. The subcommittees on judiciary and public administration are continuing consultations to finalize the drafts within this week.

The outcome of this legislative process is expected to directly impact the speed of policy implementation across government ministries. If the revision passes, the National Police Agency must significantly increase its budget for next year to procure advanced equipment and secure specialized personnel to strengthen investigative capabilities, as organizational restructuring and personnel system improvements must be carried out immediately following the transfer of authority to conclude investigations. The economic sector expects positive effects such as clearer standards for investigating corporate crimes and less room for arbitrary interpretation, but companies are preparing countermeasures, including strengthening internal compliance systems to guard against potential side effects during the transfer of investigative authority.

Ultimately, the processing results of these two core bills could serve as a decisive watershed in gauging the balance of power between the ruling and opposition parties for the remainder of the 22nd National Assembly's term. As the regulation of filibusters and the abolition of supplementary investigation power are directly linked to political calculations regarding voters ahead of the next general election, a high-intensity confrontation between the two parties is inevitable during the upcoming plenary voting process.