Ministry of Justice: "Kim Yeo-sa Special Prosecutor Law, Nominally 3-Party Recommendation... Effectively Appointed by the Opposition"

"Against the Principle of Separation of Powers, Request for Retrial"

The Ministry of Justice announced that it will request a reconsideration from the National Assembly regarding the 'Kim Geon-hee Special Prosecutor Act,' which mandates the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court to recommend candidates for special prosecutors, calling it a "nominal 'third-party recommendation' but in reality a special prosecutor appointed by the opposition party."

On the 26th, after the Cabinet meeting approved the reconsideration request for the Kim Geon-hee Special Prosecutor Act, the Ministry of Justice released a five-page press release. The Ministry stated, "The Deutsche Motors case, which is the subject of investigation under the Special Prosecutor Act, is currently still being tried at the Supreme Court," and added, "Having the head of the Supreme Court, who is presiding over the related case, recommend the candidate for the special prosecutor who will conduct the investigation directly violates the principle of separation of powers."

It further pointed out, "If the opposition party deems the candidate recommended by the Chief Justice unsuitable, it can exercise an 'infinite veto right' until a candidate preferred by the opposition is recommended," and emphasized, "Ultimately, it only has the appearance of a 'third-party recommendation,' but in effect, it grants the opposition party the right to recommend the special prosecutor candidate."

The Ministry of Justice stated, "Allowing the opposition party, which filed the main complaint, to also exercise the right to recommend the special prosecutor risks collapsing the judicial system, which is founded on objectivity, fairness, and political neutrality as core values."

Regarding the Deutsche Motors stock manipulation case and allegations related to Mr. Myung Tae-gyun, which are subjects of the Special Prosecutor Act, the Ministry noted that conclusions have already been reached or investigations are ongoing by the prosecution and the High-ranking Officials' Crime Investigation Office (Gongsucheo), stating, "This goes against the principles of subsidiarity and exceptionality, which are fundamental to the special prosecutor system." It added, "There is a high possibility of halting ongoing investigations or duplicating investigations, leading to double investigations by multiple agencies, as well as targeted investigations, separate investigations, and excessive investigations," and remarked, "While claiming to be an 'independent investigative agency with the nature of a standing special prosecutor,' it denies the existence of the Gongsucheo, which was newly established under opposition leadership."

The Ministry also cited concerns about excessive investigation periods and manpower deployment leading to potential human rights violations due to over-investigation, the possibility of political public trials through briefings on the special prosecutor's investigation and trial procedures, and the expected enormous expenditure of taxpayers' money as reasons making the reconsideration request unavoidable.

The Ministry of Justice further explained that the United States, where the special prosecutor system has a longer history than Korea, abolished the special prosecutor law around 1999 due to various side effects such as ▲ the special prosecutor being used to attack opposing parties ▲ prosecuting minor political scandals solely for achievements ▲ inability to control abuse of power ▲ interference by non-expert special prosecutors in investigations by investigative agencies.

It concluded, "There are concerns that this Special Prosecutor Act may become a tool for 'investigations chasing people rather than evidence' to reach a predetermined conclusion. Not requesting reconsideration would violate the president's duty to protect human rights, uphold the constitution, and prevent unconstitutional laws."