Police Investigation Authority Expansion Leads to Side Effects; Special Prosecutor's Political Language, Criticism of Forced Mourning for Monk Myeongjin

The recent discovery of a missing woman's body in Jeju 104 days after her disappearance has brought the police's initial investigation into question. The case became highly controversial after it was revealed that the police had arbitrarily closed the case despite receiving a missing person report immediately after the victim's disappearance. The police stated that they closed the case after speaking with the victim, who reportedly said she 'did not want to disclose her whereabouts,' and evidence of destruction, such as the deletion of relevant CCTV footage, was later found.

The host pointed out, "The police received a missing person report for this woman and then arbitrarily closed the case themselves," raising criticism over the police unilaterally closing the case despite reports from family and acquaintances. This raises serious questions about the police's investigative system and case handling procedures.

The police's actions led to demands for reinvestigation from the victim's family and are criticized for making the truth harder to uncover. Critics point out that the police's complacent attitude and failure to fulfill their duty to ensure the safety of the missing person ultimately led to a tragic outcome.

It has been reported that the police officer who arbitrarily closed the Jeju missing person case was a 'Gyeongjang' (corporal), revealing the vulnerability of the current system where even low-ranking officers can unilaterally suppress serious cases. The host and lawyer Hwang Sung-wook pointed out, "He's a Gyeongjang, right above a Patrolman. This means even a low-ranking police officer can conceal a case," expressing concern that such a system can easily lead to the suppression of cases.

This structure perpetuates a situation where cases are only reinvestigated if victims or their families directly report them again and actively raise issues. Lawyer Hwang Sung-wook criticized the current investigative system, stating that "the situation where victims have to investigate and prosecute themselves is constantly repeating," emphasizing that victims' suffering can be exacerbated in the absence of proactive investigative intent from the police.

In criminal policy and criminology, it is estimated that 'dark figures' (undiscovered crimes) amount to 10 to 20 times the number of actual crimes, even with well-established systems. Lawyer Hwang Sung-wook stated, "Even with active intervention from national investigative agencies, that many crimes are inevitably buried. If they are openly concealed like this, it takes tremendous effort for ordinary citizens to overcome it," pointing out the seriousness of police arbitrarily closing cases like the missing person incident.

This implies that if investigative agencies do not actively intervene, countless crimes may sink below the surface and never be resolved. Particularly when considering situations where victims find it difficult to report or give up due to distrust in the justice system, there are concerns that the actual crime rate may be much higher than statistics suggest.

According to interviews conducted by the Hankook Ilbo with 30 senior police officers in Seoul and regional areas, concerns have been raised about the deepening regional polarization of police's public security investigative capabilities after the amendment of the Criminal Procedure Act, which abolished direct prosecution investigation and supplementary investigation. The host reported, "The police now have to take full responsibility for public security investigations, and there will be complete regional polarization in their investigative capabilities," predicting a widening gap in investigative capacity between police in the Seoul metropolitan area and other regions.

In particular, regional police are expected to face difficulties in handling complex and specialized cases due to a lack of experience in economic crime investigations and staffing shortages. This not only weakens the overall investigative capacity of the police but also could result in local residents not receiving adequate judicial services.

Considering that the original intent of adjusting investigative powers was to strengthen the police's investigative capacity, these concerns about polarization suggest the need to re-evaluate the policy's direction. Ultimately, with the sole responsibility for public security investigations resting with the police, the regional disparity in investigative capacity is emerging as an issue directly related to citizens' access to justice.

It has been revealed that the workload of frontline police officers has surged since the adjustment of investigative powers. Lawyer Hwang Sung-wook stated, "In the metropolitan area, investigators are complaining that they have to handle over 70 cases per person," indicating a drastic increase in the number of cases individual investigators must handle. This raises concerns that it could increase investigators' fatigue and degrade the quality of case processing.

On the other hand, regional police are complaining about work confusion due to handling cases in areas where they lack expertise, saying, "We've never investigated embezzlement or breach of trust cases, we can't even think about it, but these cases keep coming." Furthermore, the fact that the responsible police officer's name is directly recorded in the investigation results has significantly increased personal responsibility compared to the past. Previously, the prosecutor in charge bore responsibility, but now police must take direct responsibility, making the lack of expertise an even greater problem.

Criticism has emerged regarding the deepening disconnect between the police's investigation stage and the prosecution's trial stage since the adjustment of investigative powers. Lawyer Hwang Sung-wook criticized, "Prosecutors with legal knowledge are in a situation where they cannot intervene in investigations at all and only see documents, which means the division of roles is completely reversed." This clearly demonstrates the problems of the current system, where the police, lacking trial experience, prepare investigation documents, and the prosecution, without supplementary investigative powers, cannot practically intervene in investigations.

This structure not only lowers the professionalism and efficiency of investigations but also can adversely affect fair trials based on legal logic. The lack of organic linkage between investigation and trial can ultimately hinder the realization of judicial justice.

Criticism has been raised that in the current investigative system, National Assembly members have virtually become a privileged class that investigative agencies cannot touch. Lawyer Hwang Sung-wook stated, "If police investigative powers are concentrated, National Assembly members simply fall out of the scope of investigation," pointing out the structural problem where investigations into National Assembly members are mostly initiated by complaints, and investigations are concluded upon the police's decision not to forward the case, effectively allowing them to avoid scrutiny.

Analysis also suggests a possible link between Chairman Lee Jae-myung's legal risk defense and these structural limitations. The fact that investigation procedures for National Assembly members differ from those for ordinary citizens can violate the principle of equality before the law and raises concerns that it could undermine political neutrality and act as an amnesty for the privileged class.

These structural problems indicate the need for fundamental institutional reform to prevent corruption among politicians and restore public trust. There is a growing voice that the status of a National Assembly member should not serve as a shield from investigation.

The special prosecutor's recent actions have been criticized for losing legal fairness and having political motives. Lawyer Hwang Sung-wook questioned, "Is this the language of a lawyer?" regarding the special prosecutor's use of political rhetoric such as "the war on treasonous forces has begun. A standing special investigation unit must be established," pointing out that they have lost neutrality and objectivity as a legal institution.

In fact, the special prosecutor's warrant application record is also controversial. The warrant rejection rate for special prosecutors reached 65%, more than three times higher than the 21% rejection rate for general prosecutorial cases. This leads to criticism that special prosecutors tend to file warrants excessively due to political motives without sufficient evidence and legal judgment.

Along with the issue of the legitimacy of special prosecutors initiated by the ruling party, such actions by special prosecutors raise concerns that they could undermine public trust in the judicial system. The focus on political attacks rather than their inherent role as legal professionals could blur the raison d'être and purpose of the special prosecutor system.

Even within the legal community, there are voices of self-reflection that special prosecutors have forgotten their role as a group of legal experts and have become political tools. This situation is expected to spark social discussion on the operation and reform direction of the special prosecutor system in the future.

Lawyer Hwang Sung-wook criticized that the legal profession has, at some point, lost its self-respect and fairness, becoming engrossed in careerism that caters to political power. He stated, "At some point, things started happening that stripped self-respect from those who wanted to become lawyers, so they started watching the political power," pointing out that while the essence of a fair trial should primarily start with 'appearing fair,' the current legal profession has abandoned even this effort.

This phenomenon severely undermines the neutrality and independence of the judicial system and is a major reason why the public distrusts the courts. The tendency to consider political advantage rather than fair judgment hinders the realization of judicial justice and can shake the foundation of the rule of law.

Doubts about the sincerity of the Special Inspector General system have intensified after Chairman Lee Jae-myung nominated lawyer Choi Il-su, recommended by the Democratic Party, during the special inspector general nomination process. Lawyer Hwang Sung-wook criticized, "If Lee Jae-myung was truly sincere about choosing someone who could monitor the corruption of the president's family... he then nominated lawyer Choi Il-su, who was recommended by the Democratic Party."

In the National Assembly, the Democratic Party, the People Power Party, and the Korean Bar Association each recommend three candidates. The criticism is that a leader of an opposition party nominating a person recommended by their own party deviates from the original purpose of monitoring the president's family's corruption. This raises concerns that the Special Inspector General system could devolve into a tool for political mudslinging.

Lawyer Hwang Sung-wook raised doubts about the effectiveness of the Special Inspector General system itself, stating, "I looked to see if there was any comparative legal example of the National Assembly creating a Special Inspector General system to check the president, and I couldn't find any." This raises fundamental questions about the efficiency and necessity of a system where the National Assembly creates a separate body to check the president, which is rare globally.

Criticism also continued regarding the separation of the presidential family's corruption monitoring function, previously handled by the Senior Secretary for Civil Affairs office, into a separate body. Despite the stated purpose of monitoring presidential family corruption, concerns were raised that the system is highly likely to be swayed by political interests.

The 'female Hitler' remark about Assemblywoman Lee Jin-sook has come under fire. Lawyer Hwang Sung-wook strongly criticized, "They don't know how enormous the word 'Hitler' is. To compare someone to Hitler in America or the West is a remark that goes to the level of 'it's you or me,'" explaining that this remark carries fatal implications beyond mere personal attack.

In the Western world, the Hitler analogy is a highly taboo expression due to its historical background and sensitivity. Using it in political debate is an extreme insult and an attack at the level of annihilation. Using unfounded analogies not only raises questions about the dignity of a politician but also degrades the level of domestic political discourse.

Such remarks are inappropriate actions that cross the line of freedom of political expression and deserve criticism. It is especially important for politicians to be more cautious with the language they use in the public sphere, given its significant impact on society as a whole.

The phenomenon of rampant hate speech, trapped in factional logic, hinders healthy democratic development and makes rational discussion impossible. There is a growing call for politicians to show respect for each other and compete with policies and visions.

The logical contradiction of the current method of criminally punishing dissent regarding the 5.18 Democracy Movement was pointed out. Lawyer Hwang Sung-wook stated, "When asked if criminally punishing someone for having a different opinion or a slightly different view on it is also a so-called leftist ideology and progressive ideology, everyone's faces sour," raising questions about penal provisions that suppress freedom of thought in a free democratic society.

Regardless of recognizing 5.18 as a democracy movement, criminally punishing the mere expression of different opinions about it can conflict with the basic order of liberal democracy. This raises fundamental questions about the extent to which freedom of expression and freedom of thought should be allowed.

Criticism has been raised that some political circles' forced mourning for Monk Myeongjin, who died during a freediving accident, is inappropriate. Lawyer Hwang Sung-wook questioned, "Is it appropriate to describe him as a great monk and great elder of the Buddhist community?" pointing out his actions and political statements that were far from the life of a religious figure detached from worldly affairs.

Monk Myeongjin was known for his active political statements during his lifetime, criticizing conservative presidents and representing the positions of specific political factions. The act of some political circles excessively forcing mourning for the death of such a figure raises concerns that it may tarnish the meaning of pure remembrance and be used for political purposes.

While the freedom of religious figures to participate and speak in politics should be respected, caution should be exercised against actions that abuse religious authority to impose specific political views. Lawyer Hwang Sung-wook explained, "The separation of religion and politics does not mean that politics should dictate religion. It means the opposite: politics should not meddle in religion. It doesn't mean religion shouldn't criticize politics," interpreting the original meaning of the principle of separation of church and state as closer to prohibiting political intervention in religion.

However, in reality, some media and religious figures, entrenched in factional logic, frequently use religious authority as a tool to support or criticize specific political forces. This distorts the essential role and social function of religion and can exacerbate social conflict. There is a growing call for religion to maintain political neutrality and not lean towards specific factions to serve as society's moral compass.

Lawyer Hwang Sung-wook warned that forcing grief and remembrance upon all citizens under the pretext of a specific death can lead to totalitarian ideas. He emphasized, "I hope they don't force any kind of memorial. That is, I hope they don't force any sadness on all citizens. This is because, at some point, one of the aspects that makes our country feel totalitarian is that the so-called left-wing faction uses a death to force remembrance and mourning."

Citing the Thai tsunami as an example, he explained that forcing grief can rather stifle hope for the future. Grief and joy are personal emotional domains, and collectively forcing them to achieve political ends conflicts with the values of a free democratic society.

Attempts by political circles to manipulate public opinion or push specific political agendas using the death of a particular individual infringe upon citizens' autonomous judgment and hinder healthy social discourse, and should be criticized. Personal emotions and ways of mourning should be respected, and a culture of forcing them needs to be guarded against.