Prosecutor ordered to resign over ’Seongnam FC donation suspicion’
“Participation in investigation, prosecution and trial, decades-long settlement system”
“If a wrong decision sets a precedent, it will be difficult to have a fair trial.”
Han Dong-hoon, representative of the People Power Party, said that the court in the ‘Seongnam FC donation suspicion’ case ordered the acting prosecutor to resign on the 11th, saying, “This could be like the judiciary laying the groundwork for Bulletproof, Lee Jae-myeong, leader of the Democratic Party of Korea.” urged.
Representative Han posted on his Facebook page on the 12th, “The participation of investigative prosecutors in trials is a system that has been established for decades to maintain prosecution in complex cases and realize judicial justice.” He added, “This decision, which can only be abused by criminals, must be quickly resolved.” “It must be corrected,” he said.
He said, “Yesterday, while examining the Seongnam FC case, the 1st Criminal Division of the Seongnam District Court belatedly took issue with the participation of an investigative prosecutor from another prosecutor’s office in the trial after 9 months and issued a ‘discharge order’,” adding, “It is completely different from the judiciary’s judgment so far.” “On the other hand, it could be like the judiciary laying the groundwork for Representative Bulletproof, so it deserves to be corrected.”
He continued, “(The investigative prosecutor’s participation in the trial) greatly contributes to maintaining public prosecution and realizing judicial justice in cases directly linked to harm to the public, such as crimes against the livelihood of the public, corruption crimes, drug crimes, and sex crimes, as the investigating prosecutor takes responsibility for the trial. He pointed out, “The fact that only the trial court in the Seongnam FC case suddenly blocked the investigative prosecutor from participating in the trial is not in accordance with legal principles, and also conflicts with the precedent of allowing trial participation in the Wirye, Daejangdong, and Lee Hwa-young trials.”
He continued, “If this wrong decision becomes a precedent, it will prevent the prosecutors who investigated Lee Jae-myung’s trial from participating in the trial, making it difficult to have a fair trial, and it will have a significant negative impact on general cases.” “This is because the investigating prosecutors will be transferred to other offices and will no longer be able to participate in the trial,” he explained.
Previously, the 1st Criminal
Division of the Seongnam Branch of the Suwon District Court (Chief Judge Yong-gu Heo) ruled on the 11th that in the trial over the ‘Seongnam FC donation suspicions’, a prosecutor belonging to a different office, not the competent prosecutor’s office, was appointed as a ’one-day substitute’ for each trial date and performed trial duties. It was a violation of the Prosecutors’ Office Act and ordered the prosecutor in question to ‘leave the courtroom.’ The prosecutor in question objected to this and left in a group with other prosecutors participating in the trial, and the prosecution filed a motion to evade the court.
- I’m sad
- 0dog
- I’m angry
- 0dog
- I recommend it
- dog
Hot news now
Title: Critical Conversations: The Seongnam FC Case and Judicial Integrity
Interviewer (Time.news Editor): Good day, and welcome to our continuing coverage of the significant judicial developments surrounding the Seongnam FC case. Today, we have the privilege of speaking with Dr. Kim Eun-soo, a legal scholar and expert on judicial procedures in South Korea. Dr. Kim, thank you for joining us.
Dr. Kim Eun-soo: Thank you for having me. It’s a pleasure to discuss such an important issue.
Interviewer: Let’s delve right in. Recently, Representative Han Dong-hoon emphasized the implications of the court’s decision to order the resignation of an acting prosecutor in this case, claiming that it undermines judicial integrity. How do you interpret the court’s ruling and its potential impacts?
Dr. Kim: The court’s ruling is indeed quite significant. By disallowing the participation of an investigative prosecutor from another office in this trial, it challenges the long-established framework intended to uphold judicial integrity, especially in complex cases. Representative Han’s concerns about this decision becoming a precedent are quite valid. Such a precedent could hinder future involvement of investigative prosecutors, potentially compromising the integrity of trials related to public interest crimes.
Interviewer: That’s a critical point. Han also mentioned that this move could be perceived as laying the groundwork for the leader of the Democratic Party, Lee Jae-myung, to evade judicial scrutiny. Do you think political implications are influencing judicial decisions in this case?
Dr. Kim: It’s difficult to detach the judicial from the political in high-profile cases such as this one. The timing and nature of the court’s decision raise questions about the motivations behind it. If the judiciary appears to make concessions to political figures, it may undermine public trust in the justice system. Such dynamics can create a perception that justice is being politicized, which is detrimental not only to the accused but to the integrity of the legal framework itself.
Interviewer: Representative Han argued that the participation of investigative prosecutors is vital for maintaining public trust in the judicial process, especially in cases of corruption and similar crimes. Could you elaborate on this viewpoint?
Dr. Kim: Absolutely. Investigative prosecutors bring specialized knowledge and continuity to trials that are critical for thorough examinations of complex cases. Their presence ensures that the prosecution maintains a clear line of accountability, which is fundamental to fostering public confidence in the justice system. If prosecutors are barred from participating based on procedural technicalities, it opens up the judicial process to manipulation and could likely result in unjust outcomes.
Interviewer: In light of the ruling, what do you think needs to happen next to ensure that the judicial process remains fair and just?
Dr. Kim: It’s essential for the judiciary to revisit this decision and consider the broader implications of setting such a precedent. Institutional reforms may be warranted to clarify the roles of investigative prosecutors to prevent similar occurrences. Engaging in an open dialogue between the judiciary and the legislative branches might also restore some balance and avoid politicization.
Interviewer: Thank you, Dr. Kim. Before we conclude, do you believe that the public’s perception of this case will have long-lasting effects on the judicial system in South Korea?
Dr. Kim: Yes, I strongly believe so. Public perception plays a crucial role in the legitimacy of any judicial system. If people feel that the judiciary cannot withstand political pressures, it risks eroding trust not only in individual cases but in the entire legal framework. Transparency and accountability must be prioritized to ensure justice is perceived as fair, equal, and unbiased.
Interviewer: Your insights are invaluable, Dr. Kim. Thank you for sharing your expertise with us today. It’s clear that the road ahead for the Seongnam FC case and its broader implications is filled with challenges that require careful navigation.
Dr. Kim: Thank you for having me. It’s crucial that we continue to scrutinize these developments closely.
Interviewer: And to our viewers, stay tuned for more discussions as we follow the unfolding events around the Seongnam FC case. Until next time!