정부의 ‘검·경 수사권 조정 합의안’에 대한 단상

Abstract

On 21 June, “The Agreement on the Arbitration of the Investigation Rights between Prosecutor's Office and Police" was announced. The important part of ‘the Agreement’ is the two new suggestions about investigation rights. The first one is to restrict the direct investigation of the Prosecutor and the second is to abolish the directions of the Prosecutor on the investigation of the Police before forwarding to the Prosecutor’s Office. This essay is to criticize ‘the Agreement’ in regards of these two suggestions, especially in a view of ‘the Reformation of the Prosecutor’s Office’ which was the most important demand of the Korean people in a so-called “Candle Demonstration” in 2016. The Agreement allows the direct investigation of the Prosecutor only on the ‘Special Crimes’, such as bribery, election crime, and corporation and economic crime. However, the reason why these crimes should be investigated not by the Police but only by the Prosecutor is not clear. Moreover, it is questionable that the Prosecutor’s direct investigation should be sustained in the future, because it could imply the possibility of the unnecessary and abusable strong power of the Prosecutor’s Office, which has been the very target of ‘the Reformation of the Prosecutor’s Office.’ The directions of the Prosecutor is prescribed in the Ordinance of the President. This Ordinance needs to be revised according to ‘the Agreement’. Therefore, this essay looks into the general principle and a few of necessary points of the future revision. The heart of the matter is how to make an investigation structure which represents “the equivalent Check and Valance” between Prosecutor’s Office and Police.