hankyoreh

President Moon Jae-in and Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-youl. (Yonhap News, Blue House photo pool)

Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-youl filed an administrative suit on Dec. 17 objecting to a two-month suspension from his duties approved by President Moon Jae-in. He also filed a request for a suspension of execution to suspend the validity of the disciplinary action.

At around 9 pm that day, Yoon’s attorney Lee Wan-gyu electronically filed an administrative suit and petition for suspension of execution with the Seoul Administrative Court. Explaining that this was a “legal action against the president’s actions and thus a legal action against the president,” Lee explained that Yoon’s basic position was one of “responding to damage to the Constitution and the rule of law in accordance with the procedures determined by the Constitution and law.”

The first of the filings to be heard is to concern the request for a suspension of execution, where Yoon plans to claim that the disciplinary action caused “irrevocable damage.” Lee explained that the suspension “halts the duties of the prosecutor general in an institution which upholds law and order, namely the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office of the Republic of Korea.”

“A two-month suspension causes irrevocable damage. Important investigations [by prosecutors] are currently taking place, and new investigations may be initiated,” he said, adding that investigations “differ depending on who the prosecutor general is, and a two-month vacuum would be large.” He further explained that Yoon had “prepared revisions to the system in relation to the adjustment of investigation powers, which requires consistent handling,” adding that the content had been included in written form.

During the litigation process, Yoon’s side is also expected to argue the unlawfulness of the disciplinary procedures and inappropriateness of their grounds. Yoon has cited the Act on Discipline of Prosecutors in raising procedural issues at every stage of the process, from Minister of Justice Choo Mi-ae’s initial pursuit of disciplinary action to the composition and selection of disciplinary committee members and the questioning of witnesses.

He is also expected to present rebuttals on individual matters that served as a basis for the disciplinary action, including allegations of monitoring judges, investigation and inspection obstruction in the Channel A case, and grounds for compromising political neutrality.

Commenting on the MOJ disciplinary committee’s decision after it was made public the same day, Lee called the content “merely speculative.”

“[Charges] were recognized without any evidence, and there were issues with the acknowledgement of claims as well,” he said. Regarding the Channel A case, he said that Yoon was “exercising his authority as prosecutor general.”

By Jang Ye-ji, staff reporter

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