Cho Kuk "Cowardly Misinterpretation" vs Jin Joong-kwon "Changed Your Mind Again?"... Illegal Surveillance Debate

[Image source=Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Choi Eun-young] Former Minister of Justice Cho Kuk criticized former Dongyang University professor Jin Joong-kwon, who mocked Cho's definition of 'illegal surveillance' from eight years ago as 'Jomandaejang-gyeong (Cho Kuk + Palmandaejang-gyeong),' calling it a "malicious and petty misinterpretation." In response, Professor Jin retorted, "Have you changed your mind again? Why are you questioning me after abandoning your own definition of 'illegal surveillance'?"

Earlier, Professor Jin referred to a post Cho made on Twitter in April 2012 on his SNS, saying, "The regime keeps confusing the media, but this is the definition of surveillance," and sarcastically added, "Jomandaejang-gyeong is a lighthouse that prevents one from losing their way even in a dark world. Since it is the word of a world-renowned legal scholar (former Minister Cho), please take note."

What Professor Jin mentioned was Cho's April 2012 SNS post stating, "1. What is the difference between legitimate official inspection and illegal surveillance? First, targeting civilians unrelated to public office or public duties is illegal. 2. Even if the target is a public official or related to public duties, if the inspection method used is illegal, it is illegal. For example, wiretapping without a warrant, searching emails, opening letters, investigating bank accounts, etc."

Former Minister of Justice Cho Kuk's tweet from April 2012 [Image source = Screenshot of former Minister Cho's Twitter]

According to the criteria presented by former Minister Cho, the prosecution's document is not actually illegal surveillance. This contrasts with Justice Minister Choo Mi-ae's action of suspending Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-youl and requesting an investigation by the Supreme Prosecutors' Office, claiming that the prosecution's document, which compiled information on judges of major cases, was 'judge surveillance.'

The document's subjects were not civilians, and the information recorded was about judges' personal tendencies or content already known through the internet and media, so illegal inspection methods such as wiretapping were not used.

Since Minister Choo announced the suspension of Prosecutor General Yoon on the 24th, former Minister Cho has consistently criticized the 'judge surveillance.' However, when past writings with content completely opposite to the current stance were uncovered, many netizens, including Professor Jin, mocked him with terms like 'Jojeokjo (Cho Kuk's enemy is Cho Kuk)' and 'Jomandaejang-gyeong (Cho Kuk + Palmandaejang-gyeong).'

Former Minister of Justice Cho Kuk, who was indicted on charges of instructing the cover-up of private equity fund corruption and the inspection of former Busan Deputy Mayor for Economic Affairs Yoo Jae-soo, is attending a trial held at the Seoul Central District Court in Seocho-gu, Seoul on the afternoon of the 20th.
[Image source=Yonhap News]

On the 27th, former Minister Cho responded to Professor Jin, calling it a "malicious and petty misinterpretation."

He added, "The issue in this case is whether the Supreme Prosecutors' Office's Investigation Information Policy Division has the authority to collect judges' reputations and personal information to maintain prosecution. This is a completely different case from the illegal civilian surveillance under the MB administration. Also, any Korean average person knows that illegal surveillance methods are not limited to wiretapping without a warrant, email searches, opening letters, or investigating bank accounts."

In response, Professor Jin also criticized, saying, "You changed your mind again? You abandoned your own definition of illegal surveillance, so why are you questioning me? The Seoul High Prosecutors' Office trial manual states that since there are differences in trial methods by court, it is necessary to understand the characteristics of each court and respond appropriately. This was neither created nor ordered by Yoon Seok-youl, and to accuse the handling of work according to the manual as 'illegal surveillance' is ridiculous. Did you study law just to do such things?"