Confusion intensifies within joint investigation into Yoon Suk Yeol

Internal divisions within the joint investigative body into President Yoon Suk Yeol’s alleged insurrection and abuse of power deepened on Monday, when the Corruption Investigation Bureau for Senior Officials said it was handing over the task of carrying out the order Yoon’s arrest to the police.

The announcement made on the last day before the order expires instantly sparked opposition from the police, saying such a directive carries a legal defect.

The CIO, which heads the joint investigation team with the police’s National Bureau of Investigation, said the directive complies with regulations including the Criminal Procedure Act, in a request it sent on Sunday afternoon. Article 81 establishes that the arrest warrant “shall be executed by a judicial police agent under the direction of a prosecutor.”

This means that the investigative body no longer intends to participate in the process of forcibly entering Yoon’s residence to arrest the sitting president, who was charged on December 14, weeks after his imposition of the law. martial on December 3.

Lee Jae-seung, deputy director of the CIO, said the withdrawal would speed up the process of detaining the president. The investigative body did not expect to encounter fierce resistance from the presidential security service on Friday when, together with the police, they attempted to enter Yoon’s residence.

“We anticipated that (the presidential office) would cooperate with the legal procedure before the seven-day order expired, but we have encountered a situation that we never predicted,” Lee said, adding that about 50 employees of the investigation team that They managed to get close to Yoon’s residence and were outnumbered by Yoon’s nearly 200 guards.

The official, however, said he would not hand over his investigative authority over the case to the police for the time being, given his prosecutorial experience that the joint investigation team would like to draw on.

But Lee said he was open to handing over authority to law enforcement, potentially to the police or prosecutors, if necessary.

In response, the police investigative body effectively rejected the CIO’s request, which it received on Monday morning.

A police officer from the National Bureau of Investigation told reporters on Monday afternoon that the CIO’s request on the execution of the order contains illegal elements. The official added that he would continue coordinating with the CIO the process of executing the order.

An unnamed National Bureau of Investigation official was quoted by Rep. Youn Kun-young, a lawmaker from the main opposition Democratic Party of Korea, that CIO prosecutors have no authority to order police to execute a warrant. This is due to the prosecution reform that restricted the powers of the prosecution during the Moon Jae-in administration.

The police’s attempt to enter Yoon’s residence following the CIO’s request could be interpreted as abuse of power, discouraging the police from carrying out the arrest warrant, according to Youn, who visited the headquarters of the National Bureau of Investigation in Seoul. on Monday.

This resonated with President Yoon’s legal representatives’ claim that the CIO’s request for the police to execute a court order on behalf of the agency could be seen as an “abuse of power in the management of police officers”, hinting at legal action. if the police act accordingly. CIO Request.

This came about a month after the establishment of the joint investigation team on December 11. The team requested that Yoon be questioned for his alleged insurrection and abuse of power three times, all of which he refused.

The CIO, which comprises about 50 prosecutors and investigators combined, has the power to apply to the court for an injunction. However, police do not have the right to do this alone and instead have to work with prosecutors to request a warrant.

But the CIO also has its own limitations. The scope of the agency’s investigation – or “corruption of a high-ranking official” as stipulated in the Law on the Establishment and Operation of the CIO – does not explicitly include insurrection in its jurisdiction. Furthermore, the CIO does not have the right to indict officials such as the president, which means that at a certain stage of the investigation, it would have to refer the case to the prosecutor’s office.

You, of the Democratic Party, added that the police had expressed their intention to wrest investigative authority from the CIO.

Rep. Ahn Cheol-soo of the ruling People Power Party also told reporters on Monday that the police should take control of the investigation and that the CIO should relent, for the sake of “procedural legitimacy” while at the same time respect the law and the Constitution when handling Yoon’s case.