South Korea will abolish its Prosecutors’ Office and replace it with two new agencies to overhaul the national criminal-justice system [1].
This restructuring represents a fundamental shift in how the state handles investigations and prosecutions. If the transition fails to establish clear legal frameworks, officials said that the most vulnerable citizens may face systemic injustice.
The plan introduces the Public Prosecution Service and the Serious Crime Investigation Agency [1]. While the goal is to separate investigative and prosecutorial powers, significant details remain undecided. A primary point of contention is whether prosecutors will retain the authority to conduct supplementary investigations [1].
Time is running short for the government to resolve these disputes. The reforms are scheduled to take effect on Oct. 2 [1]. According to officials, approximately five months remain before the new agencies must open [1]. To accelerate the process, the preparatory team for the Serious Crime Investigation Agency was launched on the 30th of last month [1].
Justice Minister 정성호 said there are risks of a rushed implementation. He said that without proper legal review and evidence, cases can be discarded by primary investigative agencies [1].
"If they just throw it away because the legal review isn't done properly and there is no evidence, the people without money or power—those without connections—are the ones who just die," 정성호 said [1].
The ministry is now tasked with bridging the gap between the current system and the proposed agencies. This involves defining the exact scope of authority for the new bodies to ensure that the transition does not create a legal vacuum that harms defendants, or victims [1].
“The Prosecutors’ Office will be abolished and replaced by a Public Prosecution Service and a Serious Crime Investigation Agency.”
The dissolution of the Prosecutors' Office is an attempt to curb the concentrated power of South Korean prosecutors, who have historically held both investigative and indicting authority. By splitting these functions between the Public Prosecution Service and the Serious Crime Investigation Agency, the government aims to create a system of checks and balances. However, the lack of consensus on supplementary investigation powers suggests a potential for jurisdictional conflict that could slow down criminal proceedings during the transition.
