[The Editors' Verdict] The Democratic Party's Abuse of Legislative Power

[Asia Economy Choi Seok-jin, Legal Affairs Specialist Reporter] The Democratic Party of Korea has decided as a party consensus to pass the ‘Complete Removal of Prosecutorial Investigation Rights (Geomsu Wanbak)’ bill in April and have it approved and promulgated at the final Cabinet meeting presided over by President Moon Jae-in on May 3.

Investigation rights inherently involve restricting physical freedom, one of the highest-ranking human rights, so the issue of determining the investigative authority is directly linked to the human rights of the people.

It is clearly abnormal for the Democratic Party to focus solely on passing the bill before President-elect Yoon Seok-yeol’s inauguration without going through a serious public discussion process on such an important matter.

Of course, in a parliamentary democracy, it is natural for the majority party in the National Assembly to lead the enactment or amendment of laws. However, the legislative power of the National Assembly and the right of lawmakers to review and vote on bills must be exercised for the people and reflect the will of the people. If legislation opposed by the majority of the public is forced through, it constitutes an abuse of legislative power that disregards the spirit of Article 1, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution, which declares that “all power comes from the people.”

The ‘Geomsu Wanbak Law’ is opposed not only by the People Power Party’s claim that it is the ‘Lee Jae-myung Shield Law’ but also by the legal community, academia, and even civic groups such as the Minbyun (Lawyers for a Democratic Society) and People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy, which have actively participated in the Moon Jae-in administration’s prosecutorial reforms. So much so that Professor Han Sang-hee, co-representative of People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy, who has strongly advocated for prosecutorial reform for over 20 years, appeared on the radio current affairs program ‘Joo Jin-woo Live’ on the 13th and said, “It’s happening too abruptly,” likening it to “a doctor cutting open a patient’s abdomen first just because there is a tumor inside, and then taking a look.”

Professor Han’s analogy is by no means an exaggeration. Assemblyman Hwang Un-ha, who is at the forefront of the Democratic Party’s reckless push for ‘Geomsu Wanbak,’ told fellow lawmakers, “There were concerns that if we proceed with the establishment of the Central Investigation Agency, the discussions would be prolonged due to many contentious issues, making it difficult to promulgate the bill by May 9,” and proposed, “So let’s first handle the urgent bill to delete the provisions for the prosecution’s direct investigation rights.”

Looking back at the prosecutorial reform process under the current administration, it has always been like this.

When concerns grew that creating the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials (CIO) would give the administration another weapon, they reassured by including two opposition party members in the CIO Chief Candidate Recommendation Committee and setting the quorum at six, but soon amended the law to appoint a CIO chief opposed by the opposition party members. What was the result? Even after a year since its launch, it failed to properly indict any cases and only caused controversies such as illegal searches and indiscriminate communication data inquiries, turning into the ‘Yoon Seok-yeol Investigation Office.’

Even after adjusting the investigative rights between the prosecution and police, the prosecution could still investigate six major serious crimes, and inadequate police investigations could be supplemented by prosecutors’ requests or direct supplementary investigations. Yet, in just over a year, they want to abolish all of that. It was a tactic to first reduce the prosecution’s investigative scope and see how it goes.

After the amended Prosecutors’ Office Act and Criminal Procedure Act were implemented, when the ‘LH scandal’ broke out, the ruling party’s urging that “the police cannot be trusted, so the prosecution should investigate quickly” was almost comical. Even now, victims of crimes loudly complain that investigations are not progressing at the front lines, and yet, without deciding which agency will investigate the six major crimes, they want to strip the prosecution’s investigative rights first, showing that the people are not considered at all.

Above all, ‘Geomsu Wanbak’ violates the Constitution. Article 12, Paragraph 3 and Article 16 of the Constitution specify that the subject who can request arrest, detention, seizure, and search warrants is the ‘prosecutor.’ Requesting a warrant is naturally a concept based on investigation. While it cannot be said that “only prosecutors are investigative authorities,” enacting a law stating that “prosecutors are not investigative agencies” or “prosecutors cannot conduct investigations” directly contradicts our Constitution.

I hope voices of self-reflection that fear the people will arise within the Blue House and the Democratic Party. If this mad rampage does not stop now, they will face the stern judgment of the people, which is far more terrifying than the prosecution under the Yoon Seok-yeol government that they fear so much.