Court Rejects Jurisdiction Recusal Request by Ja-tong in ‘Changwon Spy Ring’ Case

The court dismissed the request for recusal of the trial panel filed by members of the Jaaju Tongil Minjung Jeonwi organization, who were prosecuted in the so-called ‘Changwon Spy Group’ case.

According to the legal community on the 26th, the Criminal Division 31 of the Seoul Central District Court dismissed the recusal request filed by four defendants in their 60s, including Mr. A, who were indicted on charges of violating the National Security Act.

The defendants, including Mr. A, filed the recusal request on September 10, arguing that the Criminal Division 30, which was handling the case, violated the Criminal Procedure Act by failing to notify key matters of the previous trial before proceeding with the trial, thereby infringing on the defendants’ right to defense.

The court stated, “The reasons for recusal raised by the defendants do not constitute objective circumstances that would make it difficult to expect fairness in the trial,” and therefore did not accept the recusal request.

It added, “There is no evidentiary material to support the claim that the trial panel in charge of the main case is conducting the proceedings arbitrarily and biasedly, or that there are objective circumstances that would reasonably justify suspicion that the defendants will face an unfair trial in the future.”

Mr. A and others were arrested and indicted on March 15 of this year on charges including receiving operational funds from the Cultural Exchange Bureau, the North Korean organization responsible for overseeing operations against South Korea, reporting domestic political situations to the North, and engaging in activities aimed at the resignation of the Yoon Seok-yeol administration, as well as anti-American and anti-government activities, from March 2016 to November last year.

Although the trial was twice suspended due to their requests for transferring jurisdiction to Changwon and for a jury trial, these requests were dismissed, and the first trial was held on August 28, about five months after the indictment.

The recent recusal request again halted the trial, and the first-instance detention period, which was set to expire on the 14th of last month, was extended.

According to the Criminal Procedure Act, the period during which the recusal request is under review is excluded from the detention period, so if Mr. A and others appeal the dismissal of the recusal request, their detention is expected to continue until the related decision is finalized.