[Reporter’s Notebook] Abolishing the Prosecution Office After 77 Years: Will the Public Suffer?

"I Did the Investigation Myself"
Victims Forced to Become Detectives Amid Delays and Inaction
The Harsh Reality of Prosecution Reform
When Citizens Are Pushed Aside and Politicians Take Center Stage
Key Questions Remain Unanswered
Ensuring

"I have gone undercover, followed suspects, and even broken into residences."

Mr. A, an office worker in his 40s who lost 200 million won to a stock trading chatroom scam, has become both a complainant and a detective. He filed a complaint about the case three years ago, but there was no progress. That was when his own private investigation began. He tracked the suspect's assets using real estate records and staked out a building that appeared to be a hideout, taking photos overnight and handing them over to the police. The response he received was as follows: "We can only catch the front man." "Even if you have to pay an administrative scrivener, get the paperwork redone."

The search and seizure and the tracking of the shell account came too late, and the criminal proceeds had already been laundered and converted into buildings and vehicles. The main culprit was caught, but the accomplices fled. He later found out that the lawyer he had consulted was representing the perpetrator. He paid tens of millions of won in legal fees to a former judge-turned-lawyer, but all he got in return was a single complaint document. The investigation was delayed. Mr. A said, "Since the police weren't doing it, I did it myself." "But if the prosecution disappears, won't we enter an era of 'private prosecution'?"

The situation on the ground is complex. The dichotomy of "prosecutors = evil, police = good" does not hold true in reality. After the adjustment of investigative authority between the prosecution and the police, the police have become severely overworked. The chaos in which complainants like Mr. A have become detectives themselves is the reality of "complete deprivation of prosecutorial investigative authority." In front of suspects who have assembled top-tier legal teams with criminal proceeds, victims like Mr. A have pinned their hopes on prosecutorial powers. There is also a misalignment in the target of prosecutorial reform. In the name of correcting the problems of the Special Investigations Division, which accounts for 10% of all cases, the investigative capacity of the Criminal Division, which handles 90% of cases, is at risk of being uprooted.

Fundamentally, it is unclear who the main beneficiaries of this reform are and for whom it is being carried out. What is clear is who stands to benefit most if the bill passes. Candidates for the upcoming local elections and the next party leadership race are receiving the most spotlight on this issue. The Special Committee on Prosecutorial Reform is filled with potential candidates for next year's elections. For them, "prosecutorial reform" is the ultimate business model, slogan, battleground, and tool for standing out.

There are many unresolved issues. What mechanisms will guarantee the political independence of the head of the Serious Crimes Investigation Agency? How will the vast investigative powers of the Ministry of the Interior and Safety be kept in check? How will the decline in investigative capacity for criminal cases be addressed? If prosecutorial personnel do not move to the new agency, what will happen to specialized investigative teams, such as those for financial, securities, and virtual asset crimes, where expertise has been accumulated?

If these questions are not answered, this reform is bound to become a patchwork. Thousands of articles in the Criminal Procedure Act, linked to the Government Organization Act, will clash one by one, creating discord. Any reform in which the public and stakeholders are pushed aside as mere extras and only politicians take center stage is doomed to fail. The side effects of reform must be minimized so as not to interfere with the basic goal of eradicating crimes that affect people's livelihoods. The public are not extras. They are the main characters and the true stakeholders.