Prosecutors' Supplementary Investigation Authority Abolished... National Assembly Subcommittee Passes Criminal Procedure Code Amendment

Institutional Entry Toward Full Independence of Police Investigation Powers

On the 28th, the National Assembly's Legislative and Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Bill Review No. 1 deliberated on and passed an amendment to the Criminal Procedure Act, led by the Democratic Party, centered on the abolition of prosecutors' supplementary investigation authority. This decision effectively paves the way for a complete separation of investigation and prosecution powers, which form the foundation of Korea's judicial system. The traditional judicial framework, where police conducted primary investigations under the direction of prosecutors, is now set to become history.

Kim Seung-won, a Democratic Party lawmaker who chairs the subcommittee, faced strong protests from opposition PPP members while changing the agenda order during the meeting, but he maintained control of the proceedings and passed the amendment. The ruling party's decision to force the bill through the subcommittee, despite the opposition's backlash, is interpreted as a strong declaration of its commitment to prosecutorial reform.

Core Issue: The Significance and Effectiveness of Abolishing Supplementary Investigation Authority

The most critical aspect of this amendment is the complete abolition of the supplementary investigation authority granted to prosecutors. This authority refers to the power of prosecutors to conduct additional investigations into facts after the police have completed their inquiry and forwarded the case, effectively acting as a control mechanism allowing prosecutors to oversee the final conclusion of a case.

However, if the amendment passes the plenary session and is enacted, prosecutors will determine indictment solely based on case records transferred by the police. With the authority to investigate prior to indictment and summon suspects fully transferred to the police, the roles of the two agencies will be clearly separated. Kim Yong-jin, a lawmaker from the Rebuilding Korea Party, previously emphasized the need for fundamental institutional improvements to separate investigation and prosecution, arguing that judicial trust cannot be restored unless the fairness of investigations is guaranteed amid allegations of judicial abuses.

Sharp Political Divide and Debate over Institutionalization

There is a sharp partisan divide regarding the bill. The ruling party emphasizes that abolishing the supplementary investigation authority is an essential follow-up measure to break the prosecution's excessive monopoly on power and ensure the independence of investigations. Their argument is that since the transfer of primary investigative power to the police has already taken place, leaving prosecutors with the power to overturn or duplicate police investigations would render the system nominal.

Conversely, the People Power Party is strongly opposing the move, raising concerns about the unchecked expansion of police investigative powers. The opposition's main argument is that without the legal checks and controls of prosecutors, arbitrary and biased investigations could proliferate indiscriminately. Critics also argue that checks and balances to control human rights violations during investigations must precede the simple separation of investigation and prosecution.

Future Legislative Schedule and Ripple Effects on the Judicial System

The amendment to the Criminal Procedure Act, having passed the Bill Review Subcommittee, must still clear the hurdles of the full Legislative and Judiciary Committee meeting and the National Assembly plenary session to be finalized. Given the ruling party's aggressive stance at the subcommittee level, a final vote is likely to take place at the National Assembly next month. Attention is focused on whether the opposition party will employ delaying tactics, such as a filibuster, before the plenary vote.

If the amendment passes, the police's role will become absolutely critical across public security and criminal cases. There will be an urgent need to secure investigative infrastructure and personnel, along with the establishment of internal mechanisms to oversee transparent and fair investigative procedures within the police force. Ultimately, how well the prosecution's monopoly on indictment and the police's monopoly on investigation operate in balance will serve as a key indicator of the future credibility of Korea's judicial system.