Reviews and Alternatives of Proposed Laws Related to Investigation of Police and Prosecution

Abstract

A revision to the Criminal Procedure Act and the Public Prosecutors Office Act for adjustment of the Right of Prosecution and Police Investigation has been designated as a fast-track bill by the National Assembly and is now under full-fledged discussion at the National Assembly. The main contents are first, while establishing both the prosecution and police agencies as a cooperative relationship, instead of abolishing the prosecution s right to direct investigations into the police, the government established the right to request supplementary investigation and corrective action. Second, instead of defining the police as the subject of the investigation and admitting the right to terminate the first investigation only in the case of non-failure, we established a number of measures to check the accuser s objection. Third, the range of the direct investigation case of the prosecutor shall be limited directly to the extent of the investigation. Fourth, in the event that the prosecutor has not requested a variety of warrants, including an arrest warrant requested by the police, a warrant review committee is set up at the High Public Prosecutors Office to review them. Last, the capability of evidence of the report of the suspect written by prosecutor shall be recognized only in the case that the defendant acknowledges the contents of the report, such as the report of the suspect preparation of the judicial police officer. Adjustment of the right of prosecution and police Investigation needs to properly decentralize the prosecution’s exceeded power and more importantly, it has to allow investigative agencies to conduct investigations independently and fairly. Accordingly, criticize the contents of the revised law, and as an alternative, first, it is required that all cases be investigated by the police in principle, instead of limiting the range of direct investigation by the prosecution while maintaining the current right to direct investigation and end investigation. Second, as the right of the prosecutor to request a warrant needs to be properly checked, the warrant review committee should also be reviewed if the prosecutor does not request various warrant requests from the police, even if the warrant review committee is set up at the same time as warrant requests are re-applied. Third, since the prosecution’s right to indict and appeal also needs to be checked, it is believed that there is a need for the establishment and operation of the prosecution jury system and the appeal review committee from Anglo-American law community. Last, since the president cannot engage in personnel affairs of the prosecutor general or at least exercise absolute authority for the exercise of fair investigative rights, it is necessary to check through parliamentary consent to prevent him from engaging in personnel affairs of the prosecutor general, and to establish a fair command and supervisory relationship of the prosecutor general, the justice minister should not be allowed to command or supervise the prosecutor general in specific cases, not in general. In the discussion of the law on the adjustment of the right to investigate prosecutors and police at the National Assembly, it is highly hoped that the system will be properly set up so that it can be reborn as an independent and fair investigative agency for the people, not a power struggle between the prosecution and the police.