Choo Mi-ae: "The exercise of investigative command authority is a legal procedure, its activation is naturally necessary"

Choo: "If the Optimus incident had been properly investigated early on, there would have been no problem"

[Image source=Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Baek Kyunghwan] Justice Minister Choo Mi-ae stated that her exercise of investigative command authority due to unequal investigations of ruling and opposition politicians was "naturally necessary as a procedure under the law as the Minister of Justice." This is interpreted as a rebuttal to Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-yeol's earlier remark that "there is a concern that it may appear as interference in investigations or prosecutions." In particular, Minister Choo mentioned, "If the Optimus scandal had been properly investigated at the beginning, there would be no current problems." The Korea Communications Agency submitted a request for investigation to the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office in October 2018, stating that "there is a strong possibility that the state's public funds were used as tools for illegal activities." At that time, the head of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office was the current Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-yeol, and the ruling party is currently criticizing Yoon's handling of the investigation.

On the 26th, the National Assembly's Legislation and Judiciary Committee began a comprehensive audit targeting the Ministry of Justice and others. The Supreme Prosecutors' Office is not subject to the comprehensive audit, so this hearing is effectively "Choo Mi-ae's time." The focus of the day was less on the investigation directions of the Ministry of Justice and the prosecution regarding the Lime and Optimus scandals, and more on the exchanges between Minister Choo and Prosecutor General Yoon. On the 22nd, during the Supreme Prosecutors' Office audit, Yoon made remarks targeting Minister Choo, saying, "The Minister and the Prosecutor General are not in a superior-subordinate relationship," and "The exercise of investigative command authority is illegal and unjust."

On the same day, Minister Choo responded via social media (SNS), stating, "The Prosecutor General is a public official who is subject to the command and supervision of the Minister of Justice by law," expressing her determination not to back down. In response, Yoon drew a line by saying, "The Prosecutor General does not attend the Ministry of Justice Minister's inauguration or retirement ceremonies. This means there is no superior-subordinate relationship," but Minister Choo cited the Prosecutors' Office Act and the Government Organization Act. Article 8 of the Prosecutors' Office Act states that "The Minister of Justice is the highest supervisor of prosecutorial affairs and generally commands and supervises prosecutors, and only the Prosecutor General commands and supervises specific cases." Article 32 of the Government Organization Act also stipulates that "To oversee prosecutorial affairs, the Prosecutors' Office is established under the Ministry of Justice."

Regarding the exercise of investigative command authority, Minister Choo emphasized, "It was naturally necessary as a procedure under the law as the Minister of Justice." Earlier, Prosecutor General Yoon had mentioned the illegality of Minister Choo's directive, saying, "(The Minister's investigative command) is certainly illegal in terms of grounds and purpose." On the 19th, Minister Choo exercised her investigative command authority for the third time in history, ordering Yoon to stop investigations into five cases, including the Lime allegations. Until now, Minister Choo has used the argument of "the legitimate legal exercise of the Minister of Justice's rights for fair and thorough investigations." Moreover, this time, even the Blue House has stepped in to defend the exercise of investigative command authority, stating it is "judged to be inevitable," so Minister Choo's stance on the investigative command authority is expected to become even firmer.

Meanwhile, former Minister of Justice Park Sang-ki actively refuted Prosecutor General Yoon's remarks during the Supreme Prosecutors' Office audit that "Minister Park requested leniency regarding then-candidate Cho Kuk" in a radio phone interview on the morning of the same day. Minister Park acknowledged that on August 27, when the first search and seizure of former Minister Cho took place, he was informed of the search and seizure while on his way to the regular Cabinet meeting and then requested to meet Yoon. However, regarding the claim that he "requested leniency," he argued, "There is no reason for the Minister of Justice to ask the Prosecutor General for leniency. It is not reasonable in common sense." He then criticized Yoon, saying, "Usually, the phrase 'Iljinjiha Manjinji Sang' (one who is above all and below all) is used to describe the old Yeonguijeong (Prime Minister), but (Yoon) is 'Muinjiha Manjinji Sang' (one who is below all and above all). Doesn't he think he is in a position to control everyone without being controlled by anyone?"