President Lee Jae-myung Asked Lawmakers Himself to Remove the Special Prosecutor's Power to Withdraw Indictments
President Lee Jae-myung has directly asked the National Assembly to remove the indictment-withdrawal clause from the special prosecutor bill on fabricated prosecutions. It is an unusual scene: a president stepping forward to ask that powers under a special prosecutor law concerning himself be scaled back. Speaking on the 18th about the "fabricated prosecution special investigation" being pushed by the Democratic Party, Lee said that "for cases where malicious investigative manipulation is suspected, it is right to uncover the truth through a special prosecutor," while adding, "please focus solely on uncovering the truth."
Background Behind the Bill
The fabricated-prosecution special prosecutor law is legislation proposed and pushed by the Democratic Party to uncover the truth behind cases in which prosecutors are suspected of having manipulated indictments for political motives. The problem lies in the clause granting the special prosecutor the power to take over and dispose of existing indicted cases—in other words, the power to withdraw indictments. The opposition has criticized this clause as a device that could terminate President Lee's own trial. Given that the president himself could be both a subject of the special prosecutor's investigation and a beneficiary of an indictment withdrawal, accusations of "self-exonerating legislation" have persisted, apart from the bill's original purpose.
According to Yonhap News, President Lee asked the National Assembly to "delete the clauses concerning the transfer or disposition of existing indicted cases, among the special prosecutor's powers that have become controversial." If the indictment-withdrawal clause disappears, the special prosecutor's role would be limited solely to determining whether manipulation occurred during past investigations.
Key Issues and the Ruling and Opposition Responses
From the Democratic Party's perspective, removing the indictment-withdrawal clause is a choice aimed at extinguishing the embers of controversy. As MBC's reporting noted, the People Power Party and other opposition figures have raised concerns that the fabricated-prosecution special prosecutor could withdraw the indictment in President Lee's case; if the clause is removed altogether, much of that controversy is expected to subside. If the special prosecutor's mandate is confined to uncovering the truth, the direct impact on the president's own trial would be reduced.
The opposition's reaction is sharp. People Power Party floor leader Jeong Jeong-sik, responding to President Lee's press conference remark that he has "no intention of seeking a second term," countered, "Can we believe words he was pressured into saying?" and argued that Lee "has flip-flopped many times, on pledges like 'I won't seize real estate with tax money' and 'I will give up immunity from arrest.'" The People Power Party criticized that "President Lee never finally said he would stand trial," accusing him of pushing the special prosecutor after pre-drawing the conclusion of fabricated prosecution. Independent lawmaker Han Dong-hoon also weighed in on the 19th, calling the resignation of Justice Minister nominee Kim Seung-won "a victory for the people" and calling for a special prosecutor into allegations of improper lobbying for approval of an experimental drug clinical trial, as the opposition counters with its own special prosecutor cards.
Legislative Process and Outlook
The initiative to revise the law lies with the National Assembly. In line with the president's request, the Democratic Party is expected to introduce a revised bill stripping the transfer-and-disposition provisions, including the indictment-withdrawal power, and put it to a plenary vote. Whether deleting the clause will go so far as to restore trust between the ruling and opposition parties, however, remains uncertain. The opposition is expected to keep up pressure over the remaining clauses as well, including the scope of the special prosecutor's mandate, the investigation period, and the method of recommending special prosecutor candidates.
The biggest variable is time. A special prosecutor law typically requires approval by a majority of the National Assembly's sitting members and presidential promulgation, and without bipartisan agreement, repeated votes in a standoff with People Power Party resistance could follow. With the special prosecutor's role narrowed to uncovering the truth, a fierce debate over scope is expected over how far the list of suspected investigation-manipulation cases should extend. With the biggest sticking point—indictment withdrawal—cleared away, that vacuum is likely to be filled by disputes over scope and independence.
