Cabinet attendance threatens neutrality of new prosecution agencies

The acting heads of the Public Prosecution Office and Serious Crimes Investigation Agency (SCIA) attended Tuesday's Cabinet meeting, the first since the two agencies were launched. Since January, the acting prosecutor general had attended Cabinet meetings after President Lee Jae Myung ordered the heads of government agencies under ministries to participate. Traditionally, however, the prosecutor general, who oversaw prosecution investigations, did not attend Cabinet meetings.

With the Prosecutors’ Office abolished and new agencies established, the government should reconsider whether their chiefs should continue attending.

The two differ fundamentally from ordinary administrative agencies. The SCIA investigates serious crimes, while the Public Prosecution Office handles indictments and prosecutions. The president and senior government officials could themselves become subjects of investigations or trials. Such agencies must maintain distance from political power. Regularly attending Cabinet meetings chaired by the president and receiving his instructions could create unnecessary perceptions of political influence.

At Tuesday’s meeting, Lee said, “Investigate rigorously, regardless of whether someone is on your side or mine, ruling or opposition. Investigative and prosecution agencies entrusted with power by the people must never wrong individuals or allow injustices to go unaddressed.”

He also urged officials to exercise restraint and caution while strictly enforcing the law and exercising their authority. These are sound principles. But presidential instructions can be interpreted differently depending on the circumstances. If the political neutrality of both agencies is to be guaranteed, the president must also exercise restraint. A first step would be to stop summoning their chiefs to Cabinet meetings.

At a Cabinet meeting in June, Lee told then-acting Prosecutor General Koo Ja-hyun that “if something is wrong, you apologize and withdraw it.” The remark prompted controversy over whether Lee was referring to withdrawing indictments in criminal cases in which he was a defendant.

Can the public trust the head of the Public Prosecution Office and the SCIA chief to handle politically sensitive cases impartially, regardless of party affiliation, if they regularly attend Cabinet meetings and listen directly to presidential instructions?

The abolition of the Prosecutors’ Office and separation of investigation from prosecution were intended to create a new institutional framework. The operating practices of the successor agencies should therefore reinforce political neutrality and independence rather than create new doubts about them.

The government should reconsider routine Cabinet attendance by the heads of the Public Prosecution Office and the SCIA.