President Lee Warns Police on New Powers: 'Severe Consequences for Investigative Misconduct'

President Lee Jae-myung stressed the critical importance of responsibility as the police are set to gain substantial new powers with the abolition of the prosecution's supplementary investigation rights. Speaking at a State Council meeting, Lee acknowledged the potential for "enormous power" granted to the police and voiced concerns about whether this transition would ensure complete safety and fairness in investigations.

“

If they hide or destroy evidence, or flip the case, do they understand the gravity of what happens? I am not confident.

"We must prepare sufficiently in advance," Lee stated, clarifying that preparation means upholding a high sense of responsibility, ethical standards, and impartiality. He emphasized the need to ensure that neither victims of crime suffer injustice nor innocent individuals are wrongly accused. He referenced the "Jang Yoon-gi case" as an example, highlighting the profound injustice victims can face when investigations falter, describing such failures as "unacceptable" and potentially life-altering.

“

We must prepare sufficiently in advance. Preparation means upholding a high sense of responsibility, ethical standards, and impartiality.

Drawing from his own extensive experience as a lawyer, President Lee admitted to having doubts about the reliability of investigations, not just by the prosecution but also by the police. He shared instances where civil disputes became entangled with criminal charges, leading to vastly different outcomes than expected. "My personal feelings are not important, but the general public has significant concerns," he added, reflecting a broader public unease.

“

My personal feelings are not important, but the general public has significant concerns.

Lee strongly advocated for holding police accountable for investigative misconduct. He questioned the adequacy of current disciplinary measures, such as short suspensions, for officers whose actions might lead to wrongful accusations or acquittals. "If they hide or destroy evidence, or flip the case, do they understand the gravity of what happens? I am not confident," he remarked. He proposed that clear investigative misconduct should warrant severe penalties, including at least dismissal or permanent reassignment from investigative roles, to ensure accountability and public trust.

“

If clear investigative misconduct occurs, shouldn't we demand higher responsibility? Shouldn't we demand at least dismissal or permanent removal from investigative duties for clear investigative misconduct?