hankyoreh

The prosecutors intend to appeal the suicide note ghostwriting case of Kang Ki-hoon - who was recently exonerated 23 years after his conviction - in the Supreme Court.

Right after he was acquitted of charges, Kang respectfully asked the prosecutors to show their regret in a manner of their choosing.

Even if the prosecutors got down on their knees in front of Kang to apologize, it wouldn’t be enough. But instead, they are coming after him with cudgel in hand.

The only way to describe the prosecutors’ behavior is as shameless.

The prosecutors argue that they cannot accept the verdict in the retrial because the handwriting analysis of the National Forensic Service (NFS) - which the Supreme Court accepted in the past - was excluded from the trial.

But before acquitting Kang, the court had already considered all the evidence. After its analysis of the handwriting in 1991, the NFS evaluated it twice more, as did several South Korean handwriting experts. In each case, the results contradicted the original analysis by the NFS.

By the prosecutors’ logic, Kang must have subsequently doctored all of the countless handwriting samples, an absurd claim. The prosecutors are clutching at straws.

Not only that, but Kang is currently finding a battle with cancer, following an operation to remove cancer cells from his liver. As the prosecutors attempt to drag out the case, time is slipping away for Kang.

The action also delays Kang’s financial compensation. Kang cannot file for criminal compensation or damages until his innocence is confirmed by the courts.

For this to be a fair contest, the district attorney ought to suffer as much psychological and physical discomfort as Kang will if the prosecutors appeal the case. However, even if the Supreme Court confirms Kang’s innocence, the prosecutor will not be charged with abuse of authority. The attorney can hide behind the name of the state and of the law.

The prosecutors have shown an unusual stubbornness about political cases in which the defendant has been acquitted in a retrial. A review of all of the political cases in which a retrial has led to a not guilty verdict from 2007 to now shows that the prosecutors have refused to accept the ruling in more than half of these cases.

These include the first People’s Revolutionary Party Incident (which the prosecutors appealed when charges were dismissed 48 years after the original conviction), the European spy ring case, the Jochongryeon spy case, the Ulleung Island spy ring framing case, and too many others to list here.

But the prosecutors go easy on those with power and money. In recent years alone, the prosecutors decided not to appeal the verdict against the president of the Hanhwa Group, Kim Seung-yeon, who was sentenced to three years in prison, suspended for five years.

The prosecutors also declined to appeal a decision about Sejoong Namo Tour Chairman Chun Shin-il - a crony of former president Lee Myung-bak - who was sentenced to actual prison terms in the first and second trial. They did the same with Lee Seok-hyun and Lee Seong-heon, lawmakers with the Democratic Party and the Saenuri Party (NFP), respectively.

There is no point in expecting a change of heart from the prosecutors. The decision now rests in the hands of the Supreme Court. When the Supreme Court was deciding whether to reopen the trial, it reviewed the trial documents for more than three years. Considering that an adequate number of court hearings have already taken place, we hope that the Supreme Court will hurry to conclude the trial and establish the truth once and for all.

Please direct questions or comments to [english@hani.co.kr]