Lee Jae-myung, candidate of the Democratic Party of Korea, and Kim Moon-soo, candidate of the People Power Party, are presenting conflicting pledges regarding investigation and judicial institutions. Lee's position is to prevent the prosecution from conducting investigations while allowing only indictments or prosecutions and to entrust investigations to the CIO and the police. In contrast, Kim's stance is to abolish the CIO and grant general investigation rights to the prosecution and police, while giving national security investigation rights to the National Intelligence Service.
◇ Lee “Reduce the power of the prosecution and strengthen the police and CIO” Kim “Abolish the CIO”
According to the 10 major pledges each candidate submitted to the National Election Commission on the 15th and concepts previously disclosed by the candidates and parties, Lee Jae-myung has included what is referred to as 'prosecution reform' in his pledges. The main content is the deprivation of the prosecution's investigation rights and the expansion of investigation rights for the CIO and the police.
On the 15th of last month, candidate Lee appeared on a YouTube channel and said, “I am thinking of significantly strengthening the CIO.” He added, “We need to increase the number of CIO prosecutors and enhance the independence of the National Investigation Agency to strengthen its capabilities.” He further stated, “Next, we need to thoroughly separate the indictment office, prosecution office, and investigation office to provide checks and balances, and create a system for mutual checks among investigation agencies.”
Previously, the Democratic Party's prosecution reform task force proposed a reform plan to abolish the prosecution office last year, dividing prosecutorial authority among the prosecution office, the Serious Crimes Investigation Division, the National Investigation Agency, and the CIO.
Lee also mentioned that he would introduce a system for disciplining and dismissing prosecutors. Under current law, prosecutors cannot be dismissed unless they are impeached by the Constitutional Court or sentenced to more than a year in prison. However, Lee did not specify under what circumstances a prosecutor would be dismissed.
Kim Moon-soo asserts that the CIO should instead be abolished. He stated, “To resolve the judicial system confusion caused by the CIO's excessive investigations, I will eliminate the CIO and transfer its investigation rights back to the prosecution and police.” He also proposed to return national security investigation rights to the National Intelligence Service.
A legal expert noted, “The Moon Jae-in administration hurriedly established the CIO, leading to confusion in the national criminal justice system,” adding, “Regardless of the content of the pledges from the major candidates, the next government must properly reorganize the criminal justice system to effectively protect the people against crime.”
◇ Lee “Expand the number of Supreme Court justices”... Kim “Establish a crime of obstructing justice”
Lee Jae-myung stated that he would expand the number of Supreme Court justices as part of his judicial-related pledges. Currently, there are 14 justices on the Supreme Court. The day before, the Democratic Party presented a legislative amendment to increase the number of justices to a minimum of 30 (as proposed by lawmaker Kim Yong-min) and a maximum of 100 (as proposed by lawmaker Jang Kyung-tae), which was referred to the subcommittee on legislation.
Lee also pledged to expand public participation in the judiciary by introducing online trials, expanding public participation trials, and increasing the scope of published rulings.
Kim Moon-soo stated that he would introduce a new law to punish actions obstructing investigations and trials, referred to as the 'crime of obstructing justice.' He remarked, “I will establish punitive provisions against actions that block or hinder investigation and trial processes, such as submitting false documents and obstructing witness appearances.”
In response, a former judge noted, “While there are positive aspects to expanding the number of Supreme Court justices, if the president conducts 'code appointments' during their term, issues of biased rulings may arise,” adding, “There needs to be a mechanism to control political bias in the appointment process for Supreme Court justices.”