Park Beomgye Clarifies: "Remarks on Transferring Kim Hakui Case to CIO Were General Legal Principles"

Minister of Justice nominee Park Beomgye appeared at the confirmation hearing held by the National Assembly's Legislation and Judiciary Committee on the 25th, responding to questions from lawmakers. Photo by Yoon Dongju doso7@

[Asia Economy, reporter Choi Seokjin] Park Beomgye, the nominee for Minister of Justice, clarified his earlier remarks regarding the "illegal travel ban" allegations against former Vice Minister of Justice Kim Hakui, which are currently under investigation by the Suwon District Prosecutors' Office, stating, "I was speaking in principle about the legal interpretation" when he said, "At this stage, it is appropriate to transfer the case to the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials (CIO)."

On the afternoon of the 25th, during the continuation of his confirmation hearing at the National Assembly, Park gave this response to a question from Yoo Sangbeom, a member of the People Power Party, who asked about the meaning of Park's earlier statement.

Yoo said, "In response to lawmaker Kim Yongmin's question about whether the Kim Hakui illegal travel ban case should be transferred to the CIO, you answered, 'At this stage, it should be transferred.' Are you saying that the prosecution's investigation should be halted?"

To this, Park replied, "That is not the case."

When Yoo followed up by asking, "Then what do you mean?" Park responded, "I was simply stating what the law says."

Yoo further asked, "Were you only referring to a literal interpretation of the law?" Park answered, "It was a general statement."

Yoo then added, "If that's the case, shouldn't the case be transferred to the CIO only after the organization is fully established? What is your opinion?"

In response, Park said, "It is not appropriate for me to comment further. I believe the CIO chief will decide on the timing. The law stipulates that if a prosecutor is suspected of a crime, the case must be transferred, as it is a mandatory provision."

Yoo explained, "The reason I'm asking is that your answer has led the entire media to report as if the case must be transferred immediately. I want to point out that your answer was highly inappropriate."

Park once again emphasized, "I was expressing a general principle."

Earlier that afternoon, during the confirmation hearing, Kim Yongmin, a lawmaker from the Democratic Party, said, "The CIO has been launched, and Article 25, Section 2 of the CIO Act states that 'if an investigative agency other than the CIO discovers a high-ranking prosecutor's crime, the head of that agency must transfer the case to the CIO.' It is not optional, but mandatory. Therefore, these cases (such as the Kim Hakui case and the Han Donghoon case) should be transferred to the CIO in accordance with the law."

Kim continued, "In this case, the Suwon District Prosecutors' Office conducted a search and seizure on prosecutor Lee, and the names of prosecutors involved in the past investigation are emerging. Since prosecutors are the subject of the investigation, shouldn't the case be transferred to the CIO?"

In response to Kim's question, Park said, "The CIO chief has been appointed, and the process of selecting the deputy chief and prosecutors has begun. According to the CIO Act, it would be appropriate to transfer the case to the CIO at this stage."

When Kim asked, "According to the CIO Act, the prosecution does not have jurisdiction over this case. Is that correct?" Park replied, "Yes, I believe it is time to transfer the case."

Park's responses could be interpreted as indicating that, upon taking office, he would promptly transfer the Kim Hakui-related case under investigation by the Suwon District Prosecutors' Office to the CIO.

However, by clarifying that he was merely stating a general principle based on the CIO Act, Park appears to have preemptively addressed concerns about the political neutrality of the CIO.