Home > Opinion > Editorials

President recognizes need for supplemental investigative authority

Published: 23 Jan. 2026, 00:00

President Lee Jae Myung points during a New Year’s press conference, attended by some 160 Korean and foreign journalists, at the Blue House in central Seoul on Jan. 21. [JOINT PRESS CORPS]

President Lee Jae Myung has spoken for a second consecutive day on the supplemental investigative authority of the proposed Public Prosecution Office, the most contentious issue in prosecutorial reform. His call to judge the matter from a practical and effective standpoint, centered on the interests of the public, deserves attention. The remarks are widely read as an effort to rein in hard-liners within the ruling party who continue to insist that any form of supplemental investigative power should be categorically denied.

Criminal justice institutions that shape daily life should be designed around the public interest, not partisan calculations or rigid ideology. On Thursday, while outlining the broader direction of prosecutorial reform, the president stressed that policymakers must closely examine which option best protects human rights and ensures meaningful remedies for citizens. The comment echoed his position at his press conference a day earlier.

The president had then said that prosecutors should, in principle, refrain from conducting supplemental investigations, but added for the first time that exceptions may be necessary. That stance reflects an attempt to reconcile reform principles with operational realities. Under revisions to the Government Organization Act passed last September, the existing Prosecutors Office will be dismantled and replaced in October by a Public Prosecution Office and a Serious Crimes Investigation Office. Yet sharp differences remain between the government and the ruling party over whether the new prosecution body should retain any investigative authority.

Those divisions surfaced again at a Democratic Party policy caucus on prosecutorial reform held on Thursday. Lawmakers voiced sharply divided views, with many arguing, in line with the president, that limited supplemental authority should be allowed in exceptional cases. Others, including National Assembly Legislation and Judiciary Committee Chair Choo Mi-ae and lawmaker Park Jie-won, have publicly maintained firm opposition. The president’s repeated guidance has yet to fully sway the party’s most hard-line voices.

Some have suggested a compromise that would bar prosecutors from direct investigations while allowing them to request that police remedy investigative deficiencies. While preferable to having no corrective mechanism at all, such an approach still carries risks.

Even without invoking the president’s remarks, the core purpose of prosecutorial reform should be clear. The goal is not simply to strip power from prosecutors but to strengthen protections for rights and liberties. Reform that clings to slogans while worsening confusion and hardship would amount to regression, not progress. Safeguards against abuse are essential, but so is realism. The government and ruling party should move quickly to reduce friction and present workable alternatives.

This article was originally written in Korean and translated by a bilingual reporter with the help of generative AI tools. It was then edited by a native English-speaking editor. All AI-assisted translations are reviewed and refined by our newsroom.