hankyoreh

South Korean President Moon Jae-in and Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-youl at the Blue House on June 22. (Yonhap News)

After the South Korean Justice Ministry’s prosecutorial disciplinary board voted on Dec. 16 to suspend Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-youl for two months, South Korean President Moon Jae-in approved the board’s recommended punishment. Following a debate that lasted late into the night, the board recognized four of the six charges brought against Yoon and decided on the severity of his punishment.

“Our decision was based on the evidence. Several options were considered [including Yoon’s dismissal], but the majority’s decision turned out to be favorable to Yoon,” said Chung Han-joong, acting chair of the board. This suggests that, while Yoon faces severe disciplinary action, it could have been even harsher.

Yoon objected strongly and announced his intention to take legal action. “This is an illegal and unfair measure resulting from an unlawful procedure and based on grounds without substance, aimed at expelling a prosecutor general with a guaranteed term in office. I will correct this error according to procedures set out in the constitution and the law,” Yoon announced in a statement.

“The disciplinary proceedings should be halted because there are grave concerns that this could be the beginning of a threat to democracy and the rule of law,” a group of former prosecutors general asserted.

In response to such claims, we can’t help but ask whether there was nothing wrong with the illegal behaviors recognized by the disciplinary board, including the composition and distribution of a document thought to represent surveillance of judges, the obstruction of an internal probe and a criminal investigation of a case involving Channel A, and inappropriate behavior connected with political neutrality. In all these actions, Yoon abused his authority as prosecutor general and weakened the political neutrality that is the very lifeblood of the prosecution service.

The rule of law means applying the law with no exceptions. The actual denial of the rule of law and democracy comes when we exempt the prosecutor general from accountability for his behavior and neutralize democratic controls.

We should reflect upon the fact that so much of the debate during the disciplinary proceedings focused not so much on whether Yoon’s behavior was right or wrong but rather on procedural issues. While it was Yoon and his allies that raised those issues, it was Justice Minister Choo Mi-ae who called into question the legitimacy of the proceedings by unilaterally calling for Yoon’s suspension.

One of the reasons the South Korean public has been so exhausted by this series of events is that the larger goal of prosecutorial reform was buried under the narrative of the Choo-Yoon feud even before Choo requested disciplinary action. The fact that countless Koreans currently face a crisis in their jobs and everyday lives because of the COVID-19 pandemic is all the more reason to draw the curtain on this wasteful controversy. In that context, it’s significant that Choo tendered her own resignation when she visited Moon at the Blue House on the afternoon of Dec. 16 to deliver the disciplinary board’s recommended punishment.

The disciplinary measures against Yoon took effect when the board’s proposal was approved by Moon. But he needs to go beyond mere administrative procedures. Many Koreans are curious about his thoughts, considering that he has stayed quiet throughout the Choo-Yoon feud.

Moon needs to be honest about why he had no choice but to discipline Yoon and what that discipline means in light of the principle of democratic controls over the prosecution service. He also needs to clarify how the prosecutors’ independence and neutrality will be guaranteed in the future. It’s time for Moon, as the head of the government and the person vested with the power of appointment, to articulate a definite judgment and point the way to a solution.

Importantly, the disciplinary measures against Yoon are inextricably linked to prosecutorial reform. The prosecution service must not be subjugated to political power, but neither should it be allowed to wield invincible power with no controls in place to prevent the abuse of that power.

That’s largely consistent with the goals of the prosecutorial reform campaign that’s currently underway. Moon could give that campaign a boost by making a heartfelt statement.

All reform efforts run into trouble. The current chaos and conflict should be taken as an opportunity to make our democracy even more mature. And Moon has an important role to play in that.

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