Disciplinary Committee Postponed, Choo and Yoon Call Truce... Power Struggle Over 'Member List and Inspection Records' Anticipated

Ministry of Justice Reviewing Objection to Disclosure of List Information... Controversy Over Illegality of Patchy Inspection Records

[Image source=Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Baek Kyunghwan] The 'Yoon Seok-yeol Disciplinary Committee,' postponed from the 4th to the 10th, is expected to spark intense controversy over 'illegality' during the remaining six days.

On the 4th, the Ministry of Justice reviewed the 'Objection to Disclosure of Disciplinary Committee Member List' submitted by Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-yeol's side the previous afternoon. Regarding this, Yoon's legal representative, lawyer Lee Wankyu, predicted, "The Ministry of Justice will inevitably have to provide the list." Since the Ministry has already partially accepted requests from Yoon's side for rescheduling, witness requests, and inspection record demands, it is expected that the Ministry will try to avoid procedural flaws.

In the legal community, whether the disciplinary committee member list is disclosed is seen as the biggest variable in the legal battles that will follow the disciplinary decision against Prosecutor General Yoon. Since the illegality during the inspection process of Prosecutor General Yoon was the basis for the previous court ruling, the same judgment criteria are expected to apply to the disciplinary committee's decision.

The disciplinary committee consists of seven members: the Minister of Justice and Deputy Minister, two prosecutors appointed by the Minister, and three lawyers, law professors, or individuals with extensive knowledge and experience appointed by the Minister. However, the list is not disclosed. Although the members serve a three-year term, it is impossible to confirm who has voluntarily or involuntarily stepped down or how much of the remaining term is left. The reason for non-disclosure is concern that if the list is known in advance, the accused in the disciplinary case might individually contact members.

The Ministry of Justice maintains a firm refusal, stating, "Disclosure is impossible under the Information Disclosure Act, and there is no precedent of revealing the member list in other prosecutor disciplinary processes." Yoon's side has stated that if they do not receive the member list, they will file a challenge against specific members during the disciplinary committee session, but this requires the approval of the majority of members to be effective.

The inspection records received by Yoon's side the previous day have also become subject to controversy over illegality. According to lawyer Lee, the inspection records provided by the Ministry of Justice amount to 2,000 pages across five volumes but contain many omissions. Numerous pages are missing sequence numbers, and Lee plans to inquire with the Ministry about additional inspection records and their provision.

Meanwhile, since Minister Choo has a strong determination regarding Yoon's disciplinary action, expectations are growing that a severe penalty such as dismissal will be issued by the disciplinary committee. In this case, Yoon is expected to initiate legal procedures, including filing for suspension of disciplinary execution and a lawsuit to cancel the disciplinary action.

In the legal community, attention is focused on the possibility that the court will accept the suspension of disciplinary execution application, as it did during the previous job suspension measure. This is because the criteria considered during the job suspension suspension application?whether "irreparable harm would be caused to Prosecutor General Yoon," whether "there is an urgent need to suspend the effect," and whether "there is a concern of significant impact on public welfare"?can also be applied to the disciplinary execution suspension application. If the court accepts Yoon's application, he will effectively be able to serve out the remainder of his term.