The Truth About the Proposal to Abolish the Prosecutor's Office: The Future Investigation System Divided into Three Agencies

Hot Potato: Why Abolish the Prosecutor’s Office Now?

In June 2025, a bill shook South Korean politics to its core. The 'Abolition of the Prosecutor’s Office'—what hidden conflicts and tensions lie behind this proposal? Who is behind it, why now, and what hopes and fears accompany it? Let’s delve into these questions first.

Background of the Prosecutor’s Office Abolition Proposal

The bill submitted by the Democratic Party signals a sweeping reform far beyond a mere organizational reshuffle of South Korea’s judicial system. At its heart, the bill calls for dismantling the existing Prosecutor’s Office and redistributing its functions across three independent institutions. But why propose such a radical change at this moment?

1. Historical Context: The abuse of prosecutorial power and political interference have long been a hot-button issue in Korean society. Controversies surrounding specific investigations during the administrations of Lee Myung-bak and Park Geun-hye only intensified the urgent call for reform.

2. Public Demand: The Democratic Party claims this bill is “the beginning of normalizing the prosecution, reflecting the voices of the people.” However, some skeptics question whether this assertion is exaggerated.

3. Political Calculations: Critics argue that this bill could be a political move aimed at curbing investigations related to the current government or specific cases.

Key Elements of the Prosecutor’s Office Abolition Proposal

According to the proposed legislation, the current Prosecutor’s Office would be dissolved and replaced by three new bodies:

• Public Prosecution Service: Responsible for all prosecutorial functions
• Serious Crime Investigation Agency: Investigates major crimes such as corruption and organized crime
• National Investigation Committee: Oversees the independence and fairness of investigations

This structural overhaul aims to prevent the concentration of power by separating investigation, prosecution, and oversight functions, thereby reinforcing checks and balances.

Voices of Hope and Concern

The debate surrounding the abolition of the Prosecutor’s Office is intense.

Supporters anticipate:

• Strengthening democracy through dispersal of prosecutorial power
• Securing political neutrality
• Enhancing independence and expertise in investigations

Opponents worry about:

• Possible weakening of investigative capabilities
• Challenges in guaranteeing political independence of the new agencies
• Legal enforcement chaos stemming from rapid changes

The controversy over abolishing the Prosecutor’s Office is not just about dissolving an institution. It represents a fundamental reshaping of South Korea’s power structure, rule of law, and democracy. The fierce debates and their outcomes will likely shape the nation’s future—and we may very well be witnessing a historic turning point.

The Birth of Three Institutions: A Major Transformation of the Investigation and Prosecution System Following the Abolition of the Prosecutor's Office

Public Prosecution Office, Serious Crime Investigation Agency, National Investigation Commission… These names alone already sound unfamiliar. How exactly will the powers of the prosecutor be divided among these three institutions, and is the domestic investigation and prosecution system really undergoing a complete overhaul? Let’s pinpoint the core of this transformation.

1. Public Prosecution Office: The Emergence of a Prosecution-Only Agency

Following the abolition of the Prosecutor’s Office, the newly established Public Prosecution Office will take full charge of the prosecution powers previously held by the prosecutors. This move aims to secure objectivity by separating investigation from prosecution. The Public Prosecution Office will focus mainly on:

• Legal judgments concerning criminal allegations
• Filing and maintaining public prosecution
• Conducting prosecutions during trials

Through this, it is expected to reduce bias during the investigation phase and create an environment where legal reasoning is purely the center of attention.

2. Serious Crime Investigation Agency: The Vanguard Against Power Abuse

The Serious Crime Investigation Agency will take exclusive responsibility for investigating major cases that prosecutors used to handle. Specifically, it will focus intensively on cases with significant social impact, such as:

• Political corruption
• Corporate malfeasance
• Organized crime

This structure was designed to dispel concerns about weakening investigative capabilities following the abolition of the Prosecutor’s Office and, rather, to enhance specialization.

3. National Investigation Commission: The Independent Watchdog

The National Investigation Commission is a newly formed entity tasked with managing and supervising the entire investigative process. Its primary roles include:

• Reviewing the legality of investigations
• Coordinating cooperation among investigative agencies
• Establishing policies related to investigations

This framework is expected to ensure transparency and fairness in investigations despite the abolition of the Prosecutor’s Office.

The Significance of Change: Power Decentralization and Balanced Checks

The abolition of the Prosecutor’s Office and the establishment of these three institutions go beyond a mere organizational reshuffle. They signify a fundamental transformation of South Korea’s judicial system. By separating investigation, prosecution, and oversight functions, mutual checks and balances become possible, which ultimately can lead to better protection of citizens’ rights.

However, for these changes to be effective, guaranteeing the independence and expertise of each institution is essential. In addition, establishing a seamless information-sharing and cooperation system among agencies remains a critical task.

The abolition of the Prosecutor’s Office and the implementation of this new system will open a new chapter in South Korea's judicial system. Whether this transformation will truly lead to the realization of justice and restoration of public trust remains a focus for the future.

Reform or Political Calculation? Diverging Views and Hidden Controversies Surrounding the Abolition of the Prosecutor's Office

Is the bill to abolish the Prosecutor's Office, wrapped in the slogan of 'the people's demand,' truly the unanimous voice of all citizens? Starting with this question, we need to delve into the hidden truths behind this reform proposal.

The Reality of Public Opinion: Is It Truly a Single Voice?

The Democratic Party claims the abolition is 'the people's demand,' but this may oversimplify reality. As commentator Seo Jang-ho points out, our society's political spectrum is highly diverse. Therefore, the phrase 'people’s demand' is likely an exaggerated representation.

Shadows of Major Scandals: Baekhyeon-dong and the North Korean Fund Transfer Investigation

Behind the discussion of abolishing the Prosecutor's Office lie politically sensitive cases such as the Baekhyeon-dong development suspicion and the North Korean fund transfer investigation. Professor Kim Cheol-hyun warns that this bill could be interpreted as political pressure related to specific cases, especially investigations involving President Lee Jae-myung. This raises doubts about the reform’s purity.

Critical Perspectives from Experts

1. Questioning Effectiveness: Some experts argue that targeted, "pinpoint" reforms are more practical than completely abolishing the Prosecutor's Office. They advocate for gradual, meticulous improvements over radical changes.

2. Concerns About Political Independence: Doubts arise over how newly established institutions, particularly the Serious Crime Investigation Agency, will maintain their independence. The key question is how much freedom they can secure from political influence.

3. Possible Decline in Investigative Capacity: There are worries that dismantling the existing prosecution system could temporarily weaken investigative capabilities, potentially impairing crime response.

Hidden Political Calculations?

There is suspicion that the bill to abolish the Prosecutor's Office is more than an institutional reform—it might be a product of political calculation. Considering the historical conflicts between prosecution and political authorities, some see this reform as an attempt to curb prosecutorial power to expand political influence.

Ultimately, the controversy over abolishing the Prosecutor's Office is more than a simple institutional reform; it reflects a microcosm of complex political and social conflicts. Genuine reform requires embracing diverse perspectives and meticulously examining underlying intentions.

Is the Future Bright? Feasibility and Remaining Challenges After the Abolition of the Prosecutor's Office

Behind the structural overhaul lies the wall of reality. Internal resistance within the prosecution, the chaos of organizational dismantling, and the restoration of public trust—all stand in the way. Can this prosecution reform truly take root successfully, and what challenges remain to be solved going forward?

1. Internal Resistance and Change in Organizational Culture

The abolition of the Prosecutor’s Office and the establishment of new agencies will deliver a significant shock to the existing prosecution system. Internal resistance is expected due to the separation of investigative and prosecutorial powers and the reduction of authority. To overcome this:

• Establish a transparent and fair personnel system
• Implement training programs to foster a new organizational culture
• Redefine performance evaluation criteria

2. Preventing a Gap in Investigative Capacity

During the transitional period when the Prosecutor’s Office is abolished and new institutions are set up, a gap in investigative capacity may arise. Measures to prevent this include:

• Develop a phased organizational reform and personnel transfer plan
• Build a systematic transfer system for existing investigation data and know-how
• Ensure continuity through the operation of temporary joint investigation teams

3. Securing Legal Grounds and Institutional Stability

The abolition of the Prosecutor’s Office goes beyond mere organizational restructuring, requiring a sweeping change in the legal system. Necessary actions include:

• Prompt enactment and revision of related laws
• Clear legal definitions of the powers and responsibilities of new agencies
• Prepare handling plans for ongoing investigations and trials

4. Guaranteeing Political Neutrality and Independence

Ensuring the political neutrality of new agencies, especially the Serious Crimes Investigation Agency, is a critical task. Measures to achieve this are:

• Increase transparency in selecting investigation targets
• Operate effective external oversight bodies
• Establish institutional mechanisms to block undue political interference

5. Restoring Public Trust and Enhancing Communication

It must be proven that the abolition of the Prosecutor’s Office is a reform for the people, not just a political decision. To this end:

• Continuously disclose information about the reform process and outcomes
• Introduce citizen-participation policy evaluation systems
• Build constructive relationships with the media to enhance transparency

The abolition of the Prosecutor’s Office and the establishment of new investigative agencies will mark a turning point for South Korea’s judicial system. However, the success of this reform depends on how effectively the challenges outlined above are addressed. Now, more than ever, public interest and participation, along with collaboration among political circles and the legal community, are crucial.

A New Horizon for the Rule of Law: Step-by-Step Change and the Key to Successfully Abolishing the Prosecutor’s Office

The controversy surrounding the abolition of the Prosecutor’s Office goes beyond a simple organizational reshuffle—it represents a profound challenge that could reshape the very foundation of South Korea’s rule of law. For this reform to succeed, comprehensive changes in laws, systems, and culture are essential. Where does this challenge ultimately lead? Could citizen participation and expert-led roadmaps be the answer? Let’s explore together.

1. The Importance of a Gradual Approach

Abolishing the Prosecutor’s Office cannot happen overnight. Radical shifts may backfire, making a step-by-step approach necessary:

• Step 1: In-depth analysis of existing prosecutorial issues
• Step 2: Preparation for establishing new institutions (Public Prosecutor’s Office, Serious Crimes Investigation Agency, National Investigation Commission)
• Step 3: Pilot operation and gathering feedback
• Step 4: Full implementation with ongoing monitoring

2. Citizen-Centered Policy Discussions

The ultimate beneficiaries of the rule of law are the people. Therefore, reflecting the voices of citizens throughout the abolition process is crucial:

• Regular public hearings and forums
• Collecting opinions through online platforms
• Introducing a citizen jury system to engage in major policy decisions

3. Expert-Led Implementation Roadmap

The success of this reform depends on the knowledge of experts who combine theory and practice:

• Operating advisory groups composed of legal scholars, active prosecutors, and lawyers
• Developing optimal models by studying overseas cases
• Establishing stepwise performance indicators and evaluation systems

4. Institutional Safeguards

To prevent new agencies from repeating past problems after the Prosecutor’s Office is abolished, solid institutional frameworks are essential:

• Building mutual checks and balances to prevent abuse of power
• Establishing transparent personnel and budget management regulations
• Installing independent audit bodies

5. Driving Cultural Change

Legal and institutional reforms alone are not enough. A fundamental cultural shift within prosecutorial organizations must occur simultaneously:

• Strengthening ethics education and conducting regular evaluations
• Operating programs to establish a horizontal organizational culture
• Diversifying communication channels with citizens to build trust

The abolition of the Prosecutor’s Office can mark a historic turning point, opening a new chapter in South Korea’s rule of law. However, for this process to succeed, active citizen participation, meticulous planning by experts, and bipartisan cooperation in politics are indispensable. Through a gradual, systematic approach and continuous communication and adjustment, we can create a more just and transparent judicial system. This is the true success of prosecutorial reform—and the dawn of a new horizon for the rule of law in South Korea.