Yoon Seok-yeol's Side: No Regulation Allowing 'Delegation' of Execution of Arrest Warrants from Public Corruption Investigation Office to Police (Comprehensive)

"Prosecutors' Office for Corruption Investigation Lacks Authority to Direct Investigations, Cannot Treat Police as Subordinate Agency"

The High-ranking Officials' Crime Investigation Unit (PCC) has decided to transfer the execution authority of the arrest warrant for President Yoon Seok-yeol to the police. In response, President Yoon's legal team argued that “the PCC does not have investigative command authority over the police.” Having claimed that the PCC’s execution of the arrest warrant is illegal due to its lack of authority to investigate treason, President Yoon’s side is now defending itself with a new argument, pointing out that there is no regulation delegating authority from the PCC to the police, even as the execution is transferred to the police who do have treason investigation authority.

On the 6th, President Yoon’s team stated, “The PCC says it will delegate the execution of the warrant, but despite having no investigative command authority over the police, it is treating the police as a subordinate agency.” The presidential side added, “If the police act as the PCC’s servants and carry out illegal warrant executions, it constitutes abuse of authority by police officers, and we will take strong legal action against this as well.”

They further said, “Illegality begets illegality, and the foundation of the judicial system is being shaken,” adding, “They should not plot judicial insurrection through trickery but must comply with proper legal procedures.”

President Yoon’s side also claimed that the Constitutional Court has not even set a date for important decisions regarding the president’s custody. The legal team said, “Despite filing a constitutional dispute trial and a provisional injunction with the Constitutional Court, it is regrettable that the court, which emphasizes promptness in presidential impeachment trials, is showing an indifferent attitude.”

Previously, on December 31 of last year, President Yoon’s legal team filed a constitutional dispute trial and a provisional injunction against the judge in charge of warrants regarding the issuance of the arrest warrant. They argued that the warrant issuance infringed upon the president’s 'constitutional duty authority' and the exercise of 'emergency powers' as a ruler under the separation of powers. This is based on the premise that the December 3 emergency martial law is an act of governance by President Yoon and therefore cannot be subject to judicial review.

President Yoon’s side argued, “Rather than filing objections to the execution while the arrest warrant is not being executed, the essential and fundamental solution to the problem is to dispute the constitutionality and invalidity of the arrest and search warrants at the Constitutional Court.” They also “strongly urge the prompt progress of the Constitutional Court’s constitutional dispute trial and the provisional injunction trial to suspend the warrant’s effect.”