hankyoreh

Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-youl heads to work at the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office on Dec. 1 following a week-long suspension. (Yonhap News)

“I promise to do my best as a public servant of the Republic of Korea to defend the spirit of the constitution and the rule of law,” South Korea’s prosecutor general said at 5:30 pm on Tuesday when he appeared at the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office (SPO) shortly after a court decided he could return to duty. Yoon Seok-youl was responding to prosecutors who asked him how it felt to be back on the job.

“I’m grateful to the judiciary for its swift decision, which enables me to return to the job so quickly,” Yoon added.

“All prosecutors must make an effort to defend constitutional values and political neutrality and become ‘the peoples’ prosecutors’ by applying the criminal code with fairness and equality. I know I can depend upon your passion for justice,” Yoon said in an email he sent to prosecutorial employees around the country immediately after returning to work, seven days after being suspended from duty.

Yoon resumed his work that evening, starting with a simple briefing in his office from senior prosecutors about what had happened during the week of his absence.

While the court’s decision gives Yoon a respite, more trouble looms ahead. Justice Minister Choo Mi-ae and the rest of the ruling party are poised to intensify their campaign against him. The Ministry of Justice (MOJ)’s prosecutorial disciplinary board, whose meeting was delayed until Dec. 4, is among the tough challenges facing Yoon.

On Tuesday, Hon. Cho Mi-yeon, chief judge in the fourth administrative division of the Seoul Administrative Court, agreed to Yoon’s request for an injunction after Choo, the justice minister, suspended him from his duties as prosecutor general.

Yoon had originally asked the court to pause his suspension until a separate lawsuit requesting the revocation of his suspension had been settled at the highest level of appeal, but the court’s injunction only applies for 30 days after the district court returns a verdict on that lawsuit.

The legality of the disciplinary action against Yoon was not addressed by the court’s ruling on Tuesday. The rationale given for that action, including allegations that the prosecutors were putting judges under surveillance, will be considered during Yoon’s separate lawsuit.

In a hearing held the day before, the MOJ argued that “there is neither any urgent necessity nor any concern that Yoon will suffer irreparable harm because the suspension of his duties will terminate on Dec. 2 [when the prosecutorial disciplinary board was scheduled to meet] regardless of what decision it makes.” But that argument was rejected by the court.

“For the duration of his suspension, Yoon is unable to perform his duties as prosecutor general,” the court said, concluding that Yoon’s suspension had inflicted “harm that is probably irreparable.”

“The effect of ordering Yoon’s suspension is to completely strip him of his authority to perform his duties as prosecutor general, which is essentially equivalent to serious disciplinary action tantamount to dismissal from office,” the court said, acknowledging the “urgent necessity” for an injunction.

The court found that, even if disciplinary procedures were scheduled, as the MOJ had argued, there was no telling when those procedures would ultimately conclude, and the court was unwilling to leave Yoon’s legal status in limbo.

The court said that the justice minister’s authority to direct and supervise the prosecutor general and make personnel recommendations was “significant as a mechanism of democratic control given the potential risk that the prosecutors will lose their political neutrality and impartiality if undue emphasis is placed on their neutrality.”

But in the court’s interpretation, “the justice minister’s exercise of the authority to direct and supervise the prosecutors, and the prosecutor general in particular, should be limited to the minimum necessity to achieve the goals of defending the legal order, protecting human rights, and [maintaining] democratic control.” The court found that, even if the authority to suspend the prosecutor general is within Choo’s prerogative, that authority should face certain limitations and only be exercised under strict and exceptional conditions.

The court also underlined the goal of the Prosecutors’ Office Act, which limits the prosecutor general to a single two-year term in order to guarantee the prosecutors’ independence and political neutrality. “If Yoon remains suspended from his duties until the end of his term [July 24, 2021], it would effectively amount to a dismissal from his post,” the court said.

The court also commented on the vigorous argument between the MOJ and Yoon’s attorneys over the reasons for Yoon’s dismissal. “The prosecutorial disciplinary board is scheduled to be held, and the accused is guaranteed the right to defend himself during the disciplinary proceedings by attending in person, giving testimony and appointing a special attorney. It seems appropriate for Yoon’s suspension to be delayed until the reasons for disciplining him have been adequately reviewed in the disciplinary proceedings, including proceedings in which Yoon is given a chance to defend himself,” the court said.

The court’s decision to grant Yoon an injunction slammed the brakes on the MOJ’s disciplinary plans, forcing it to delay the disciplinary panel, which is supposed to discuss the allegations brought against Yoon, until Dec. 4. The MOJ explained the delay as being designed to “adequately guarantee procedural rights, including the right to legal defense.”

“We respect the court’s decision to grant an injunction as being a judgment on the temporary measure of suspending [Yoon] from his duties. The decisions about whether the allegations are true and what disciplinary measures are warranted will be made by the prosecutorial disciplinary board following conscientious deliberations in accordance with laws and procedures,” the MOJ said.

By Joh Yun-yeong and Ock Kee-won, staff reporters

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