[Column by Son Sung-jin] If You Were the Victim

"We are not on the teacher's side, nor on the students' side. We stand only on the victim's side." In the drama "The Good Teacher," the inspector from the Teachers' Rights Protection Bureau says this. It feels like a message aimed at politicians trying to abolish the supplementary investigation authority. Despite opposition from many quarters, the National Assembly recently introduced a revision to the Criminal Procedure Act of the Republic of Korea that would eliminate the Prosecutors' Office's supplementary investigation authority. The damage from abolishing this authority would fall on crime victims. Victims could suffer secondary harm.
In criminal cases, there are perpetrators and victims, with the Prosecutors' Office or the Police investigating the crime in between. Under the current Criminal Procedure Act, the Police conduct the initial investigation, and if the Prosecutors' Office finds gaps, it carries out supplementary investigations. The move to strip away even this authority is intended to completely curb the excessive power of the Prosecutors' Office.
During the authoritarian era, the Prosecutors' Office served as a tool for maintaining power. In return, it wielded unchecked authority and ruled over others. Prosecutorial power was overwhelming, and the office became a massive, dinosaur-like power structure. Abolishing the supplementary investigation authority is an attempt to take away even the last small knife, so that the Prosecutors' Office can no longer abuse power through collusion with those in power.
However, abolishing the supplementary investigation authority leaves ample room for constitutional challenge. First, it violates the balance of legal interests. In its focus on prosecution reform, it ignores the legal interest in protecting victims. It deprives victims of the chance to uncover the truth and infringes on their fundamental rights. It also conflicts with the constitutional provision that grants prosecutors the authority to request warrants. The supplementary investigation authority should place greater weight on the constitutional value of victim protection than on the policy goal of weakening prosecutorial power.
Investigations are not perfect because they are carried out by people. Even an outstanding detective like Columbo can overlook or miss things. Last year, the Prosecutors' Office requested supplementary investigations in more than 93,000 cases, accounting for 10.7% of cases sent by the Police. That means there were that many cases the Prosecutors' Office judged to be poorly or insufficiently investigated. A comparable number of victims are tied to those cases.
At just the right moment, the Jang Yoon-gi case, the Busan roundhouse-kick case, and the death of film director Kim Chang-min came to light. The truth that might have been buried through supplementary investigations by the Prosecutors' Office was revealed. When the Prosecutors' Office and the Police cross-check a case, they are more likely to find blind spots and move closer to the substantive truth. That is how the concept of supplementary investigation should be understood. The Prosecutors' Office and the Police are not in a superior-subordinate relationship; rather, they are complementary and mutually checking institutions. The Prosecutors' Office can also serve as a watchdog over police investigations. Trials have a three-tier system to give defendants the right to defend themselves. Supplementary investigation authority is, in a sense, a second level of review for investigations.
Objectively speaking, the Police lag behind the Prosecutors' Office in investigative capability. No matter how much the Police deny it, that is the reality. The Prosecutors' Office has relatively stronger capabilities. Completely stripping the Prosecutors' Office of investigative authority is regrettable in that it would erase the investigative expertise and know-how it has built up over time.
The Police also fall short in terms of trustworthiness and morality. They may deliberately turn away from the truth and side with perpetrators. There could be a second or third Jang Yoon-gi case. The Police are vulnerable to pressure from power and the lure of money. A former deputy commissioner of the National Police Agency, a senior official, was indicted on charges of intervening in a case after receiving 1 billion won, and prosecutors sought a 15-year prison sentence. That is one example.
Those pushing hard to abolish the supplementary investigation authority should imagine that they or their families have become victims. Try to understand their anguish. Among key figures in the ruling party are people who were investigated by the Prosecutors' Office over political cases. They may have suffered humiliating and harsh treatment from the ruthless Prosecutors' Office while resisting dictatorship. That may be why they are so determined to pursue prosecution reform.
Seen from another angle, they too were victims. The perpetrator, of course, was the Prosecutors' Office. As fellow victims, they can understand the feelings of victims well. They know the helplessness of having no institution to restrain the perpetrator and nowhere to appeal. As the opposition party has pointed out, ironically, it was also the Prosecutors' Office that uncovered the truth in the Park Jong-cheol case.
Stripping the Prosecutors' Office of investigative functions and turning it into the Public Prosecution Office is already a settled path. Leaving the supplementary investigation authority in place would not undermine the broader framework of prosecution reform. In general, the authority applies to ordinary criminal cases, such as sexual violence, assault, and murder. It has nothing to do with prosecutors who curry favor with power and ride the tide of the times. Most prosecutors work quietly, focused on justice and the substantive truth.
Rather than trying to wipe out prosecutorial power entirely, it is time to be wary of the emergence of new power. The Police could take the place of the Prosecutors' Office and be reborn as another dinosaur. Whether it is the Prosecutors' Office or the Police, the problem is not the lower-level power itself. The key lies in the higher-level power. Everything depends on the administration that oversees that organization.
[email protected] Editorial Director Reporter