The debate over the complete abolition of prosecutorial investigation powers is intensifying, with a post from a police officer in 2022 gaining renewed attention.
Recently, an anonymous post titled "As a current police officer, I oppose the complete abolition of prosecutorial powers more than anyone" surfaced on various online communities.
In 2022, a police officer identified as A, affiliated with the National Police Agency, candidly revealed the realities faced by police investigations following the adjustment of investigation rights between police and prosecutors on the anonymous workplace community platform, Blind.
In the post, A explained that without an increase in investigative personnel or measures to alleviate workload, the number of cases assigned to each investigator has skyrocketed, ranging from 80 to nearly 200 cases.
"As a current police officer, I can say that police officers are the ones opposing the complete abolition of prosecutorial powers the most," A stated. "It seems that some people do not understand how serious this issue is. Even now, after the adjustment of investigation rights, each investigator is assigned a minimum of 80 cases, with some handling 100 to 200 cases. Investigators are unable to cope and are avoiding investigative departments or leaving the force altogether."
A further noted, "While citizens pressure us for updates on investigations within a week, the reality is that there are at least 50 to 200 cases waiting in front of us. The time required to process cases has increased from the previous 1 to 2 months to a minimum of 6 months to over a year, and it is common for complex fraud and embezzlement cases to be delayed for years."
He then directly compared the investigative capabilities and organizational structures of the police and prosecutors. A pointed out, "Unlike ordinary civil cases such as theft or assault, uncovering large-scale financial fraud or power-related corruption involving hundreds of millions or billions of won is not possible through simple investigations alone."
He explained that while prosecutors work in teams with specialized investigators for months, conducting account tracking and legal reviews to carry out planned and supplementary investigations, police face structural limitations in pursuing detailed investigations against large-scale intelligent crimes or suspects represented by major law firms.
In particular, A sharply identified the "ultimate beneficiaries" if the supplementary investigation rights of prosecutors are completely abolished. He argued that if the prosecutorial functions for supplementary and direct investigations are paralyzed, only major criminals, politicians, and large corporations that can mobilize powerful law firms would benefit from the loopholes created by delayed and inadequate investigations.
He concluded, "The results of the restructuring of investigation rights, driven by political calculations or to cover up their own corruption, ultimately provide a shield to those who are knowledgeable about the law and have money, while ordinary citizens, who lack power and cannot afford major law firms, are deprived of opportunities for judicial relief and suffer the consequences."
Online users have reacted explosively to A's post. Comments include, "This is a true reflection of the realities faced by police investigators," "This level of analysis should be featured on current affairs programs or 'I Want to Know That,'" and "If you've experienced damage due to investigation delays, you can only empathize 100%."
In the legal community, there are growing concerns that the restructuring of investigative frameworks driven by political interests has exacerbated confusion on the ground and regressed the judicial welfare of citizens. Calls for urgent reforms prioritizing the enhancement of actual investigative capabilities and the protection of citizens from harm are gaining momentum.
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.