Ahead of a revision to the Criminal Procedure Act scheduled for October this year, nearly seven out of 10 members of Lawyers for a Democratic Society (MINBYUN), a progressive lawyers' group, believe that prosecutors' supplementary investigation power should be retained in full or in part, a survey has found.
MINBYUN released the results of an opinion survey of 403 member lawyers on Sunday. The survey was conducted from Feb. 30 to March 3. MINBYUN added that it had decided to release the survey results as they are, saying, "Despite fierce debate and discussion over a considerable period regarding this revision to the Criminal Procedure Act, we were unable to reach a single position on some of the issues."
On whether to abolish prosecutors' supplementary investigation power, 45.9% of respondents (185 people) said it should be "partially retained." Another 21.1% (85 people) said it should be "fully retained." Combining partial and full retention brings the total to 67.0% of all respondents. By contrast, 31.3% (126 people) supported "full abolition."
If supplementary investigation power is recognized, 64.9% said "compulsory investigation should also be allowed." This exceeded those saying "only voluntary investigation should be allowed" (35.1%) by 29.8 percentage points.
Regarding the scope and requirements if supplementary investigation power is partially retained, 62.5% of respondents (215 people, multiple responses allowed) chose "permitted within the scope of maintaining identity." Another 43.6% (150 people) chose "when a statutory deadline is imminent," and 39.2% (135 people) chose "limited to specific crimes."
In addition, 43.2% of respondents said the "current maintenance" of the full-case referral system is needed. Another 23.8% chose a "partial full-case referral system" (introduced only for serious violent crimes and the like), and 23.6% chose "complete restoration of the full-case referral system." Some 6.7% answered "conditional full-case referral system" (full-case referral on the premise of abolishing supplementary investigation power).
As for systems and measures that should be supplemented if supplementary investigation power is fully abolished, 78.3% of respondents (multiple responses allowed) called for "strengthening the effectiveness of the supplementary investigation request system." This was followed by "improving the reinvestigation request system" (58.7%), "strengthening the investigation review committee" (47.2%), "establishing a prosecutor interview system" (39.7%), and "introducing an investigation human rights protector system" (37.8%).
As for systems to remedy victims' rights if police retain the power to close cases, 87.1% of respondents (multiple responses allowed) called for "mandatory and detailed statement of reasons for non-referral." Others said the following were needed: "establishing a victim's right to object" (79.7%), "granting complainants the right to file objections" (74.9%), and "strengthening prosecutors' power to demand corrective measures" (54.3%).
As for measures to guarantee victims' rights that should be included first in the revision of the Criminal Procedure Act, 80.4% of respondents (multiple responses allowed) chose "mandatory notification of investigation progress." Opinions were also raised that the following were needed: "allowing the right to inspect and copy investigation records" (79.2%), introducing a victim participation system (ancillary prosecution system) (66.5%), "making the adjudication application system substantive" (59.3%), "introducing pre-sentencing investigation for sentencing deliberation" (53.6%), "limiting unnecessary arguments" (43.9%), and "granting the right to file for recusal of a judge" (27.8%).
MINBYUN explained, "In the process of revising the Criminal Procedure Act, the issues surrounding prosecutors' supplementary investigation power and the full-case referral system must be discussed in depth solely from the perspective of realizing judicial justice," adding, "Political interests or controversies over past errors must not serve as the background or standard for the discussion." MINBYUN also said, "A framework must be designed so that the two agencies, along with the existing police and the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials, can check and balance one another," and stated, "Guaranteeing citizens' human rights and realizing judicial justice must be the only purpose." It went on to say, "The National Assembly must gather its wisdom to create precise systems that ensure citizens' rights are firmly guaranteed within criminal justice procedures, while realizing the task of our times: the separation of investigation and prosecution."
