Confusion over calculating detention periods needs to be resolved
Published: 13 Mar. 2025, 00:00
Audio report: written by reporters, read by AI
The Supreme Prosecutors' Office's decision on Tuesday to instruct local prosecutors to calculate detention periods in "days" rather than "hours" has added to the confusion following the court's decision to cancel President Yoon Suk Yeol's detention. Before this, the Seoul Central District Court's Criminal Division 25, presided over by Judge Ji Gui-yeon, ruled that the period excluded from the detention calculation should be measured in hours, not days, and found that the prosecution had exceeded the detention period by more than nine hours when indicting President Yoon. The court also noted that the insurrection investigation by the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials (CIO) raised questions and that clarity in procedures and legality of the investigation process was desirable.
![Prosecutor General Shim Woo-jung arrives at the Supreme Prosecutors' Office in Seocho District, southern Seoul, on March 10. [YONHAP]](https://koreajoongangdaily.joins.com/data/photo/2025/03/13/0b4256ea-a5c0-440a-a854-c23fcca6951c.jpg)
Under the Criminal Procedure Act, the prosecution can contest the court's decision to cancel detention through an immediate appeal. However, the prosecution decided to forgo the immediate appeal, citing a precedent from the Constitutional Court that deemed such appeals unconstitutional when used to nullify bail or the suspension of detention. This led to President Yoon's release after 52 days in custody, sparking debates about whether this standard could be applied to other suspects.
This might have been understandable if the prosecution respected the court's judgment and planned to calculate detention periods conservatively. However, instructing local prosecutors to calculate detention periods in days as before contradicts the decision to forgo the immediate appeal. If the president's detention period is calculated in hours while ordinary suspects' periods are calculated in days, it raises questions about the fairness of the prosecution's guidelines. Would the prosecution have made the same decision if the suspect were not the president? The decision to forgo the immediate appeal also raises doubts about whether it was the best course of action. Prosecutor General Shim Woo-jung stated on Monday that the immediate appeal had potential constitutional issues, and he decided accordingly. However, he disagreed with the court's calculation of the detention period and instructed prosecutors to contest this in the main trial. Yet, contesting this issue in the main trial does not fundamentally resolve the problem.
During the emergency inquiry at the National Assembly's Legislation and Judiciary Committee Wednesday, Cheon Dae-yeop, director of the Court Administration Office and Supreme Court justice, responded to lawmakers' questions, stating that the court seemed to have taken the strictest stance among the theories on calculating detention periods, and that higher courts' judgments would be needed. While it is generally accepted that ordinary appeals cannot be made in cases where immediate appeals are possible, there is an interpretation that they might be possible if immediate appeals are deemed unconstitutional. The court's questioning of the CIO's authority to investigate treason also becomes a significant variable in the insurrection trial. Therefore, it is desirable to seek higher courts' judgments. The prosecution should avoid causing controversy with inconsistent instructions and find ways to resolve procedural confusion promptly.
Translated using generative AI and edited by Korea JoongAng Daily staff.
Prosecutor General Shim Woo-jung arrives at the Supreme Prosecutors' Office in Seocho District, southern Seoul, on March 10. [YONHAP]
Under the Criminal Procedure Act, the prosecution can contest the court's decision to cancel detention through an immediate appeal. However, the prosecution decided to forgo the immediate appeal, citing a precedent from the Constitutional Court that deemed such appeals unconstitutional when used to nullify bail or the suspension of detention. This led to President Yoon's release after 52 days in custody, sparking debates about whether this standard could be applied to other suspects.
This might have been understandable if the prosecution respected the court's judgment and planned to calculate detention periods conservatively. However, instructing local prosecutors to calculate detention periods in days as before contradicts the decision to forgo the immediate appeal. If the president's detention period is calculated in hours while ordinary suspects' periods are calculated in days, it raises questions about the fairness of the prosecution's guidelines. Would the prosecution have made the same decision if the suspect were not the president? The decision to forgo the immediate appeal also raises doubts about whether it was the best course of action. Prosecutor General Shim Woo-jung stated on Monday that the immediate appeal had potential constitutional issues, and he decided accordingly. However, he disagreed with the court's calculation of the detention period and instructed prosecutors to contest this in the main trial. Yet, contesting this issue in the main trial does not fundamentally resolve the problem.
During the emergency inquiry at the National Assembly's Legislation and Judiciary Committee Wednesday, Cheon Dae-yeop, director of the Court Administration Office and Supreme Court justice, responded to lawmakers' questions, stating that the court seemed to have taken the strictest stance among the theories on calculating detention periods, and that higher courts' judgments would be needed. While it is generally accepted that ordinary appeals cannot be made in cases where immediate appeals are possible, there is an interpretation that they might be possible if immediate appeals are deemed unconstitutional. The court's questioning of the CIO's authority to investigate treason also becomes a significant variable in the insurrection trial. Therefore, it is desirable to seek higher courts' judgments. The prosecution should avoid causing controversy with inconsistent instructions and find ways to resolve procedural confusion promptly.
Translated using generative AI and edited by Korea JoongAng Daily staff.
with the Korea JoongAng Daily
To write comments, please log in to one of the accounts.
Standards Board Policy (0/250자)