단상斷想

In South Korean politics, prosecutorial reform is more than just institutional reform; it's at the heart of a power struggle. The memory of Roh Moo-hyun pushing for it, being frustrated, and dying, the traces of Moon Jae-in stopping and aligning with the prosecution, and now the reality that Lee Jae-myung faces clearly reveal that prosecutorial reform is a territorial dispute over political power that goes beyond institutional design.

The debate currently underway within the Democratic Party can be divided into a special committee proposal to dismantle the Prosecutors' Office and create a new power landscape, and Minister of Justice Jung Sung-ho's proposal to pursue gradual reform centered on the Ministry of Justice. When Lee Jae-myung's intention is expected to be the latter plan pursued by Jung Sung-ho, it may seem like a difference in the pace of reform procedures at first glance, but in reality, it is a significant power-type desire between some pro-Moon factions and some progressive YouTubers who are trying to establish a power structure within the Democratic Party and the foundation for future government operation.

The plan presented by the Democratic Party's Special Committee on Prosecution Reform is radical. It proposes abolishing the Public Prosecutor's Office altogether, converting it into a Prosecution Office responsible only for indictment and prosecution maintenance, and transferring investigative powers to the Serious Crime Investigation Agency under the Ministry of the Interior and Safety. This effectively means dismantling the power of the prosecution. This line, led by Representatives Jung Chung-rae and Min Hyung-bae, is based on the logic that true democracy is only possible by completely severing the prosecution's investigative powers. Min Hyung-bae has not been a prominent figure until now. Although his political color was not clear, he is now a figure who is making his voice heard as Jung Chung-rae becomes the party leader. Whether he is still pro-Moon is unknown, but it is already clear that he is not pro-Lee Jae-myung. To them, prosecution reform is not a matter of institutions, but a task at the level of dismantling power, and they have a historical responsibility to complete the unfinished reform. They are well aware that this line, with its strong symbolism and enthusiastic support from supporters, will be an important opportunity to extend their political lives. However, at the same time, there are significant practical side effects. An investigation vacuum, controversy over the neutrality of organizations under the Ministry of the Interior and Safety, and escalation of social conflict may be inevitable.

In comparison, the plan presented by Justice Minister Jung Sung-ho is more cautious. He proposes establishing a Serious Crime Investigation Agency under the Ministry of Justice, while leaving some investigative command and supplementary investigation rights to the prosecution. This is a practical plan to ensure the stability of the system while maintaining the direction of prosecutorial reform. Minister Jung Sung-ho, based on his long legal experience, values the operability of the system more than the symbolism of reform. His line emphasizes gradual reform rather than radical dismantling, and institutional stability rather than political symbolism. This is presumed to be a plan that reflects Lee Jae-myung's realism. It places emphasis on reality rather than the justification for reform or political identity. The fact that discord arises within the Democratic Party depending on the degree of reform itself suggests that the power-oriented lawmakers do not care about the President's intentions. The intention underlying the opposition is more impure than opposition for the sake of opposition.

A noteworthy point in this process is Lee Jae-myung's attitude. In the process of mediating internal party conflicts, he expressed his desire for "the party's opinion to be decided after sufficient discussion." On the surface, it seems like a neutral statement, but in reality, it is an attitude that places more weight on realistic reform lines like Minister Jeong Seong-ho. Despite his political situation with judicial risks, Lee Jae-myung inevitably prefers stable reform rather than radical lines. Unreasonable progress prioritizing the completeness of reform may be effective in consolidating support, but it is likely to lead to the departure of the middle class and the shaking of the foundation of government operation. Therefore, the President and the Minister effectively share the same direction. Considering the years that the power enjoyed by the prosecution has eroded this society, there is a need for a slow but sure approach, rather than a simple and forceful dismantling, and a time to properly review the history of the Korean prosecution. Historically, the prosecution came from the Japanese police and the prosecutor system. Voices calling for radical reform in the Democratic Party may appear to be hastily handing over that corrupt power to the Ministry of Public Administration and Security to see the birth of a new power.

Reformists within the Democratic Party are continuing a strangely confrontational hard-line path, wanting to turn the failures of the pro-Moon Jae-in era into their own successes under the Lee Jae-myung government. Jung Chung-rae, Min Hyung-bae, and Choi Kang-wook are figures who solidified their political positions by leading the prosecution reform drive during the Moon Jae-in administration. They advocate the cause of completing the reforms that the Moon Jae-in government left unfinished. This is the same justification as pro-Lee Jae-myung and anti-Kim policy. They assert the justification of following historical narratives riddled with justification and Sadae主義 (serving the great), but to think that Joseon's pro-Ming and anti-Qing policies align with the actual reality and historical descriptions of the time is nothing more than childish rote memorization of colonial historical views.

However, in the political reality, their reform line functions as a means of power struggle within the party, claiming to dismantle the prosecution's power in name and complete democracy. In reality, it is closer to a political move to consolidate their power and seize the initiative within the party. In this regard, the Democratic Party's reformists can be said to be pursuing independent political power on the extension line of the pro-Moon faction. In addition, the progressive community, which is fueling this situation, may be reduced to a mouthpiece with a desire to become the second Kim Eo-jun. Kim Eo-jun's actions clearly had a time when he quenched a lot of thirst with groundbreaking ideas and novelty, but he is becoming precarious as he becomes a power himself. Knowing this relationship, the intention of the progressive channels that are fueling the behavior of incumbent Democratic Party lawmakers trying to focus on new power instead of the prosecution like moths is obvious.

The current discussions on prosecutorial reform within the Democratic Party are essentially divided into two. One is the stable reform path shared by President Lee Jae-myung and Minister Jeong Seong-ho, who prioritize the stability of the system and the sustainability of the regime while controlling the excessive power of the prosecution. The other is the radical reform path advocated by reformists. This path promotes the strong symbolism of dismantling prosecutorial power, but in fact, it inherits a pro-Moon identity and implies an intention to expand political power.

In the end, this fight is not a matter of institutions, but a test that divides the Democratic Party's path. Whether the Democratic Party will complete institutional reform by forming a national consensus through stable reform, or fall into a vortex of internal power struggles by advocating radical reform, depends on future discussions and agreement processes. President Jae-myung Lee's emphasis on 'deciding party opinions through discussion' is not just a procedural requirement, but also a test of leadership to coordinate power struggles within the party and determine the future of the Democratic Party. If we hold a public debate in front of the people, the true colors will be revealed as values and ideologies behind the logic, not just justification, will erupt. Don't leave it to the excitement of progressive channels, but hold a public debate as advised by the president.

Prosecution reform will be a watershed moment at the crossroads of Korean democracy. However, whether that task will lead to the completion of democracy or fade into internal power struggles depends on the people's choice. The people must now decide whether the stable reform path shared by President Lee Jae-myung and Minister Jung Sung-ho can become the party's official position, or whether the hard-line path of the reformers will once again shake the center of the party. Without checking the dirty power lust, such as Jung Chung-rae's behind-the-scenes work to seize party members and the legal prohibition of dual party membership, not only the speed and direction of prosecution reform, but also the power structure of the Democratic Party, the stability of the regime's operation, and even the direction of Korean politics will be determined.

Just recall that in the Democratic Party leadership election, a large number of incumbent Democratic lawmakers, 152 of them, supported Park Chan-dae. Let's engrave in our minds the words of the former prostitute First Lady that the enemy of the Democratic Party is within the Democratic Party.