It’s time to discuss the future of the CIO

The Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials (CIO) is almost three years old, but questions surrounding its raison d’être remain. CIO head Kim Jin-wook has come under fire after texts he exchanged with his deputy, Yeo Woon-kook, while attending a meeting with the National Assembly’s special committee on budget review, were disclosed. The two were discussing Kim’s potential successor. Yeo mentioned that the likelihood of a specific person’s acceptance was “zero.” Kim answered that there were some candidates from the prosecution, but none among judges.

Kim’s three-year term ends in January. The chief of the extraordinary law enforcement agency does not have any legal right to recommend their successor. Kim explained that he was merely guessing at possible candidates, not making any recommendation.

He also betrayed suspicion towards the judges in charge of reviewing arrest warrants. While naming certain judges, Kim suggested he would file arrest warrants according to their tendencies — an admission that sheds doubt on the objectivity with which he approaches the task. He has since claimed that he was merely proposing to be more prudent in filing arrest warrants. But his remarks do not make any sense.

The CIO, which was launched unilaterally by the Moon Jae-in government to weaken the prosecution’s power after it investigated government figures, raised doubts and worries about the judicial process. The then-governing Democratic Party (DP) clashed with the then-opposition conservative party when the former tried to railroad the bill. The conservative party even underwent trials for the force it used while trying to block the fast-tracking of the bill. That party went on a filibuster relay for more than 26 hours but failed to stop the legislation.

The fate of the CIO fell into limbo after former prosecutor general Yoon Suk Yeol, who fought against the Moon administration, became the president last May. As a presidential candidate, Yoon vowed to shut down the office. Although it remains intact, its role and function have been sharply weakened. Yoo Byung-ho, secretary general of the Board of Audit and Inspection, was summoned by the CIO four times, but has never complied. The CIO has handled 6,907 cases but has filed for — or recommended — an indictment on only eight. It has never been able to attain an arrest warrant from the government or political parties.

The CIO has sparked controversy around its political bias and completed very few successful investigations. The legislatuture has formed a committee to recommend the office’s next head. Before appointing that person, the government and rivalling parities must hold serious discussions about the future of the agency. They must put aside their differences to come up with a specific outline for a makeover.