[Inside Chodong] The Prosecution and the CIO: Body, Speech, Writing, and Judgment

Warrant Shopping and Martial Law Intervention Allegations
Investigations by Prosecution and CIO Lose Public Trust
Degenerating into a Mud-Slinging Battle Targeting Each Other

Tang Emperor Taizong, Li Shimin, presented the criteria of "Shin-eon-seo-pan" (body, speech, writing, and judgment) as the standard for appointing talented individuals to government positions. This is recorded in the New Book of Tang (Xin Tang Shu). First, "body" refers to a dignified and commanding presence, with poise and composure?someone who is refined but not arrogant, and who knows how to be prudent. Second, "speech" means one must speak logically and uprightly; words are synonymous with trust. Those who frequently change their statements are not fit for state affairs. The Chinese, who view calligraphy as an art form, believed that a person’s character is reflected in their handwriting. Writing should be both precise and beautiful. The final criterion is judgment; for public officials, discernment is an essential and self-evident requirement.

Emperor Taizong applied these standards to the imperial examination system, and Gwangjong, who introduced the examination system to Goryeo, also adopted these criteria for selecting talent. Although these standards for public office recruitment date back 1,400 years, the fact that they are still referenced and applied today shows that the wisdom of "learning from the old to understand the new" is not far-fetched.

The reason for bringing up Emperor Taizong’s story is to discuss the prosecution and the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials (CIO). Amid the ongoing political turmoil surrounding President Yoon Suk Yeol’s impeachment, controversies involving these two agencies have been unending. If we were to propose a model for their work based on the standards of Shin-eon-seo-pan, it would be as follows: "They should conduct investigations that inspire trust, support their work with meticulous speech and writing in warrants and indictments, and present logical and convincing reasoning and judgments in court that anyone can accept." Are they living up to these standards?

The CIO is currently facing a crisis of trust. The so-called "warrant shopping" allegations have been exacerbated by discrepancies between the initial statements (speech) of Director Oh Dongwoon and his written explanations (writing) a month later. This has only fueled the controversy. Despite having filed a warrant with the Seoul Central District Court, he confidently declared there was none. It was later revealed that his initial written response to a ruling party lawmaker’s inquiry also contained falsehoods. Only after President Yoon’s team claimed to have found evidence of the warrant filing did he change his statement. Furthermore, Director Oh’s tendency to blame dispatched staff who are not legal professionals?a so-called "out-of-body" explanation?has raised fundamental questions about governance itself.

Yonhap News Agency

The prosecution also engaged in questionable actions during the investigation into the December 3 Martial Law. The National Assembly’s "Yoon Suk Yeol Insurrection Fact-Finding Team" even disclosed reports that senior prosecutors communicated with military counterintelligence commanders and were dispatched to the National Election Commission during martial law. As the body responsible for investigating and prosecuting top military commanders, the prosecution now finds itself under suspicion. Although prosecutors immediately explained that it was merely a "courtesy call," doubts remain. Prosecutors should be prudent in their conduct and avoid even the appearance of impropriety. The prosecution’s refusal?three times?to approve the police’s request for an arrest warrant for Kim Sunghoon, Deputy Chief of the Presidential Security Service, who holds the key to the "secure phone usage records" during martial law, as well as their decision not to appeal the court’s cancellation of President Yoon’s arrest, remain sources of controversy.

On top of this, the two agencies have been engaged in an unseemly mudslinging match. The prosecution has raided the CIO, while the CIO is vowing to investigate prosecutors. Their conduct is far from dignified; they are quick to make excuses, and their logic and judgment are anything but rigorous. If Emperor Taizong were here, he would not have chosen such people.