hankyoreh

April 22. 　　

As the prosecutor entertainment list scandal has continued to spread, prosecutors have announced their intent to carry out a prompt investigation of the matter and are focusing on preventing the effects of the scandal from spreading further. However, observers within and outside the prosecutors are already expressing concern that this case may end up with a publicized investigation, but no resolution, as has been the case with previous investigations of legal corruption in the prosecutors’ office.

A 1997 legal corruption case in Uijeongbu marked the first time in judicial history that a large number of sitting judges were subjected to an investigation. The prosecutors’ investigation showed that fifteen Uijeongbu District Court judges received millions of Won each from fourteen attorneys for purposes such as bribery, but the prosecutors decided to forgo indictment because the money received was not directly connected with the judges’ duties. In 1999, another legal corruption case broke in Daejeon, where currently serving prosecutors were found to have received brokerage payments from an attorney after helping with appointments on a case. An investigation by a joint investigation headquarters under orders from the Prosecutor General uncovered evidence that 25 prosecutors had received money from the attorney, but the prosecutors concluded the case by accepting resignations from six prosecutors, including two at the senior public prosecutor level, and subjecting seven others to disciplinary measures.

Observers are saying that the prosecutors’ blade toward their own has become even duller in recent years. In the case of the “X File” disclosed by New Progressive Party (NPP) Chairman Roh Hoe-chan, prosecutors only indicted Roh, without any investigation of the senior prosecution officials named as having received bribes. In 2007, it came to light through the revelation of Samsung slush fund by attorney and whistleblower Kim Yong-cheol that senior prosecution officials had received “sweeteners,” among them current Justice Minister Lee Kwi-nam, but the special Samsung inspection and investigation team created at the time concluded its investigation by declaring that there was no evidence, without ever summoning or questioning the prosecutors named. Indeed, according to the office of main opposition Democratic Party (DP) Lawmaker Lee Choon-suak, an internal inspection for the years 2004 to 2009 revealed a total of 98 prosecutors had violated the law, but only eighteen of them received severe disciplinary measures.

As though conscious of these results of investigations on legal corruption over the years, skeptical views are already emerging within the prosecutors. A Supreme Public Prosecutors’ Office official said of the formation of a civilian commission to investigate, “They can inspect all they want, but nothing will come of it.” The official added, “There is no way the inspection will discover something illegal, but if it does, the prosecutors could find themselves in a worse position due to heavy criticism from the public.”

In particular, observers are saying that it is difficult to find any real determination to investigate the situation, given that the fact-finding group that is to handle investigation affairs within the investigation commission is made up only of prosecutors, including Daejeon High Prosecutors’ Office chief Chae Dong-wook. Another official with the Supreme Public Prosecutors’ Office blamed the statute of limitations, saying, “They may be able to investigate things from the past where the statue of limitations has passed, because of public opinion, but there is no legal implication behind it.”

Other observers are saying that if the prosecutors are unable to conduct an investigation into members of their own prosecutor family, some external prodding will be necessary. While accusing the 57 prosecutors on the list of receiving bribes, People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy (PSPD) said on Thursday, “If we see the prosecutors burying this away as with various corruption cases in the past, there will inevitably be another investigation through a special prosecutor or office investigating corruption among senior public officials, and this will became yet another disgrace for the prosecutors.”

Cho Guk, law professor of Seoul National University College of Law, said, “In overseas cases as well, there exists no institution like the prosecutors in South Korea that wields such concentrated, unchecked authority.” Cho added, “If the prosecutors do not show strenuous efforts, then calls to create a new body to check their power, such as an office for the investigation of senior public officials, will inevitably gain strength.”

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