hankyoreh

During the “Yongsan Tragedy” trial yesterday, prosecutors asked for a heavy sentence of five to eight years against the protesters. Prosecutors argued that protesters spread paint thinner and threw Molotov cocktails, directly causing the fire that hurt police officers and caused the loss of six lives. This claim runs both counter to the facts revealed during the course of the trial and demonstrates sheer stubbornness on the part of the Public Prosecutor’s Office.

According to the facts revealed during the course of the trial alone, the prosecutors’ logic which imputes all the blame for Yongsan tragedy on the individuals protesting against eviction no longer holds. In announcing their initial investigation results, prosecutors explained that the fire broke out when the Molotov cocktails thrown by the protesters set alight thinner on the watchtower floor. Yet among the SWAT officers, not one testified that they witnessed Molotov cocktails being thrown while they were entering the building. Moreover, there was testimony from one SWAT officer that the protesters had not spread any thinner, but rather a barrel of thinner got knocked over as the officers took the guard tower. Civilian experts and specialists from the National Institute of Scientific Investigation (NISI) said they could not conclude where the fire had started and why. In fact, it is said that in a place full of flammable vapors, there is a higher probability that fire was caused by an electric generator or the police’s electric cutting machine. Experts and firefighters agree that if the police had not entered the building, the fire could have been prevented.

It was also revealed during the course of the trial that the police were unaware of these hazards. The police command on the ground at the time testified that they did not know that the guard tower was full of flammable materials. They did not expect the possibility of an explosive fire. It was basically a confession that they launched a operation in haste. There was even police testimony that prior to the operation, that they did not negotiate or meet face-to-face with protesters even once. As a result, it appears the excessive crackdown is the cause of the tragedy which took the lives of five of the residents and one police officer. Prosecutors, however, said this was an instance of exercising official duties, and cleared police officials of misuse of authority. They have in effect shut their eyes in order to not hold the party that should be assuming responsibility for this tragedy accountable.

There are many other reasons for the prosecutors’ argument to be thrown out. One is the fact that prosecutors continued to refuse to reveal some 3,000 pages of investigation notes, despite an order from the court. It makes sense that suspicions are growing that suggest prosecutors are taking the side of the police and trying to cover-up the excessive crackdown and misuse of authority of police officials. This is not just an instance where the defendants’ right to a proper defense has been denied, but also a case where the legal system is failing. We hope for a wise and brave judgment from the court.

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