The outrageously disappointing result of the prosecution’s investigation into the Sung Woan-jong scandal is raising calls for reopening the probe by appointing an independent counsel.
On the surface, there seems no problem in bringing in a special prosecutor as the ruling and opposition parties share the view that the prosecution’s investigation failed to get to the bottom of the scandal.
There are obvious reasons why the case should be subject to an independent probe. Basically, the Sung case is a scandal surrounding the deceased tycoon’s allegations that he gave illicit money to President Park’s close associates. Some of the money, Sung made it clear, was funneled into Park’s past presidential campaigns.
After an investigation of more than 80 days, prosecutors indicted only two of the eight politicians mentioned by Sung. Citing statutes of limitations and a lack of evidence, they dropped charges against all the remaining six, including Park’s former and incumbent chiefs of staff and key managers of her past election campaigns.
This is yet another case in which the state prosecution, the nation’s top law enforcement authority, looks the other away from issues that may put the incumbent president in difficulty.
So there is absolutely no reason to delay the appointment of a special prosecutor. What concerns us, however, is the main opposition party’s insistence on enacting a new law exclusive to the Sung case in ignorance of the existing law on a special prosecutor.
The opposition’s worries about the possibility of even a probe by an independent counsel failing to reveal the truth are not unfounded, but the ruling party insists that the Sung case should be dealt with through the current “Standing Special Prosecutor Law,” which was enacted under bipartisan agreement last year.
The law allows the National Assembly ― with a vote by a majority of its members ― or the Justice Minister to ask the president to name a special prosecutor. Previously, the National Assembly required a new act whenever there was a case requiring a probe by a special prosecutor.
The new law’s main objective was to prevent confrontations between rival parties from impeding the speedy appointment of special prosecutors. It is nonsensical that the opposition is seeking to repeat the same folly even without applying the law to a single case.
It will only result in the parties again wasting time wrangling, which will help the issue slip from public consciousness. That in turn will only make Park and those implicated in the case happy.
