Prosecutors to Act More Actively on Retrials for Human Rights Abuse Cases

The Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office has taken a significant step forward by announcing an improved approach to retrials for past human rights violation cases. This initiative, detailed by Third Deputy Prosecutor Kim Tae-hoon, signals a crucial shift from prioritizing 'legal stability' to actively pursuing 'substantial justice.' For too long, the system has been burdened by the legacy of past injustices, and the prosecutor's office now acknowledges that its previous focus may have hindered the full realization of the retrial system's potential.

This move is particularly noteworthy given the statistics: in the last three years, prosecutors have recommended retrials in 41.7% of applications and sought not-guilty verdicts in 58.8% of cases where retrials were granted. These figures, while showing progress, also highlight the challenges faced by claimants in proving past state misconduct, often due to lost or aged documentation. The prosecutor's office's commitment to actively seeking out evidence, as demonstrated in the retrial case of General Kim Woong-su, who was convicted of anti-revolution charges after the 1960 coup, is commendable. In that instance, the prosecution analyzed historical records to confirm facts when the family struggled to provide proof of unlawful detention.

“

In the past, we have focused on securing 'legal stability' in retrial cases initiated by claimants, but this has meant that the other value of the retrial system, 'realizing substantial justice,' has not been sufficiently reflected. Henceforth, the prosecution will faithfully fulfill its duty as a representative of the public interest and an objective law enforcement agency to comply with due process and ensure human rights protection in retrial cases.

From the perspective of the Hankyoreh, this enhanced focus on the prosecutor's 'duty of objectivity' is paramount. This duty requires prosecutors to consider evidence favorable to the defendant, a principle often neglected in the past, leading to what could be described as investigative overreach. As the Prosecutors' Office is set to be reorganized into a prosecution office in October, this renewed commitment to human rights and objective investigation is vital. It is an opportunity for the institution to transform into a genuine human rights protection body, ensuring that past violations are not only rectified but also that such abuses are prevented in the future. The proactive stance in these retrial cases is a welcome development, offering hope for greater accountability and justice.

“

The prosecutor's duty of objectivity means that the prosecutor, as a representative of the public interest, has a legal obligation to consider facts favorable to the defendant.