[2020 National Audit] Tomorrow's Ministry of Justice Hearing... Expect Fierce Clash Between Chu Mi-ae and Yoon Seok-yeol

On the morning of the 6th, Choo Mi-ae, Minister of Justice, is entering the Government Seoul Office to attend the Cabinet meeting. [Image source=Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Choi Seok-jin] The National Assembly’s Legislation and Judiciary Committee’s audit of the Ministry of Justice, expected to feature the fiercest exchanges between the ruling and opposition parties, is just one day away.

During this audit, opposition party members are expected to fiercely criticize Minister of Justice Choo Mi-ae over the prosecution’s decision not to indict her son regarding the ‘failure to return from leave’ allegations and her ‘false answers’ in the National Assembly.

On the other hand, ruling party members are likely to counterattack by questioning the investigation into Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-yeol’s mother-in-law and wife to defend Minister Choo.

Additionally, issues such as the prosecution’s organizational restructuring and biased personnel appointments carried out under the pretext of prosecutorial reform since Minister Choo’s inauguration, as well as the prosecution’s passive investigation into asset management companies like Lime and Optimus?where concrete lobbying involving the Blue House and ruling party politicians has been revealed?are also expected to be raised.

Opposition’s Sword vs. Ruling Party’s Shield... Loud Exchanges Expected Over Witness Adoption and Data Submission Requests Even Before Questioning

According to the National Assembly on the 11th, the Legislation and Judiciary Committee will conduct the audit of the Ministry of Justice starting at 10 a.m. on the 12th.

Opposition members, who have been dissatisfied with Minister Choo’s actions since her inauguration?such as issuing an investigative directive that stripped Prosecutor General Yoon of his command in the ‘media collusion’ case and blatantly appointing pro-government prosecutors to key positions in two rounds of personnel reshuffles?are expected to launch sharp questions given their firm stance and dissatisfaction with her responses in the National Assembly.

Minister Choo, a five-term lawmaker, is also expected to speak her mind during the audit, unlike previous ministers who took a passive defensive stance, which could lead to loud exchanges between the heads of the audited institutions and committee members.

If ruling party members, who must defend Minister Choo, strongly object to opposition members’ procedural motions such as witness adoption or data submission requests, clashes between ruling and opposition members could disrupt the early stages of the audit, preventing proper questioning and answers.

Focus on Son’s Military Service Allegations and False Answers... Attention on Whether Minister Choo Will Apologize

In this Ministry of Justice audit, opposition members are expected to focus their attacks on various allegations related to Minister Choo’s son’s military service, the fairness of the prosecution’s non-indictment decision, and Minister Choo’s multiple false answers in the National Assembly.

After the prosecution’s non-indictment decision, Minister Choo warned opposition parties and the media raising suspicions through her Facebook, but attention is on how she will explain her past statements proven false by the prosecution’s investigation report.

Especially considering that the events occurred several years ago and memories may be inaccurate, the fact that over 20 false answers were given in the National Assembly makes it noteworthy whether Minister Choo will show a delayed apology.

Conversely, ruling party members are expected to defend Minister Choo by criticizing the delays in the prosecution’s investigation into various allegations surrounding Prosecutor General Yoon’s mother-in-law and spouse.

Targets of Attack Include Prosecution Reorganization, Biased Personnel, and Improper Investigative Directives

Since her inauguration, Minister Choo has downsized or abolished investigative departments such as the Special Investigation Division and Public Security Division at frontline prosecution offices as part of prosecutorial reform, converting them into criminal divisions.

Recently, the Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Office’s Anti-Corruption Investigation Division 1 launched a public investigation into SK Networks, but it is reported that the investigation was triggered by suspicious fund flows identified by the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) in 2018 and referred to the prosecution.

Other than that, it is true that since Minister Choo’s inauguration, the prosecution has not even started significant investigations into power-related corruption or large corporate corruption.

Minister Choo also reorganized the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office’s structure, abolishing key deputy-level positions such as the Investigation Information Policy Officer and Senior Research Officers for Anti-Corruption and Violent Crimes, who acted as the Prosecutor General’s right-hand men. Some have criticized this as a de facto weakening of Prosecutor General Yoon’s power under the guise of prosecutorial reform.

The Ministry of Justice’s Legal and Prosecutorial Reform Committee went further by proposing in July to abolish the Prosecutor General’s specific investigative command authority entirely, distributing it among high prosecutors and allowing the Minister of Justice to issue investigative directives to them in writing. Minister Choo also proposed separating investigation and prosecution within the prosecution, sparking controversy.

During the audit on the 12th, opposition members are expected to question whether these prosecutorial reform measures promoted by Minister Choo are genuine reforms to correct the prosecution or merely policies to weaken its power.

Additionally, criticism is expected over the investigative directive that stripped Prosecutor General Yoon of his command, which supported Seoul Central District Prosecutor Lee Sung-yoon’s confidence in proving collusion with Prosecutor Han Dong-hoon in the ‘media collusion’ case, as an abuse of authority beyond the minister’s power.

The Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Office investigation team, which indicted former Channel A reporter Lee Dong-jae without including Prosecutor Han’s collusion in the indictment, has yet to indict Prosecutor Han even two months after indicting Lee.

Meanwhile, criticism is also expected regarding the biased personnel appointments in two rounds of reshuffles after Minister Choo’s inauguration, where many special prosecutors aligned with Prosecutor General Yoon’s faction were demoted, and pro-government prosecutors were appointed to key positions in the Ministry of Justice, Supreme Prosecutors’ Office, Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Office, and the Financial and Economic Crime Investigation Division.

Lime and Optimus Lobbying Allegations Emerge Just Before Audit... Was the Securities Crime Joint Task Force Abolished for This?

Recent media reports have raised suspicions that the prosecution delayed investigations despite securing documents and testimonies indicating that Optimus Asset Management, under investigation for a multi-billion won fraud fund sale, lobbied the Blue House, ruling party, political circles, and financial authorities.

The document, dated May 10, reportedly contains information that government and ruling party figures participated as project beneficiaries and were involved in the fund’s setup and operation, expressing concerns that if issues arose, it could escalate into a gate (power-related corruption) scandal.

Despite this, the Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Office, which is investigating the case, is suspected of failing to properly report the investigation status to Prosecutor General Yoon.

Meanwhile, in the trial related to Lime Asset Management prosecuted by the Seoul Southern District Prosecutors’ Office, former Star Mobility Chairman Kim Bong-hyun, known as the ‘money master’ behind Lime, testified as a witness that he handed 50 million won to Kang Ki-jung, Blue House Senior Secretary for Political Affairs, through Star Mobility CEO Lee Kang-se.

Especially after Minister Choo abolished the Securities Crime Joint Task Force at the Seoul Southern District Prosecutors’ Office in January, financial crimes involving ruling party figures have continued, sparking rumors. Kim Young-gi, the last head of the task force, recently said in a media interview, “I still don’t know why the task force was suddenly abolished,” and expressed his view that it was ultimately to weaken the prosecution’s power.

The lobbying allegations against the Blue House and ruling party that surfaced just before the audit, along with suspicions of the prosecution’s ‘inadequate investigation,’ pose a significant burden for Minister Choo.