Democratic Party Proposes Amendment to Criminal Procedure Act to Abolish Supplementary Investigative Authority... "Establishes Police Oversight Mechanism"

Making the Police Commission More Substantive and Introducing a Local Police System as Alternatives

Combined Review Scheduled in the First Subcommittee of the Legislation and Judiciary Committee on July 10

"Supplementary Investigative Author

On July 9, the Democratic Party of Korea proposed an amendment to the Criminal Procedure Act that calls for the abolition of the prosecution's supplementary investigation authority. Although there have recently been opinions within the Democratic Party suggesting that exceptions to the supplementary investigation authority should be discussed in light of the Jang Yunki case, the party's Criminal Procedure Act Amendment Task Force (TF) has put forward a bill centered on its abolition.

According to the Task Force, the amendment is structured around three main pillars: adjustment of investigative authority, strengthening oversight and checks on investigative agencies, and enhancing protection for complainants, victims, and others.

(Seoul=Yonhap News) Reporter Donghae Lee — On July 9, 2026, Democratic Party lawmakers Seungwon Kim, Hankyu Kim, Sanghyuk Park, and Haesik Lee, members of the Criminal Procedure Act Amendment Task Force, submitted a partial amendment bill to the Criminal Procedure Act to the National Assembly's Secretariat. [Joint Coverage]

With the abolition of the supplementary investigation authority, provisions such as Article 196 of the Act, which regulates prosecutorial investigations, have been entirely deleted. Instead, judicial police officers will now be able to request legal advice and cooperation from prosecutors regarding legal judgments or the appropriateness of evidence collection.

In place of the supplementary investigation authority, new mechanisms to check police powers have been introduced. The grounds for judicial police officers to refuse a prosecutor’s request for supplementary investigation have been removed, requiring them to initiate the supplementary investigation and report the results to the prosecutor.

Chief prosecutors at each level of the public prosecutors’ offices will be able to request the replacement of the judicial police officer in charge of supplementary investigations when necessary. Furthermore, if it is deemed difficult to expect an appropriate supplementary investigation from a particular investigative agency, the chief prosecutor can designate another agency to conduct the supplementary investigation. In such cases, the supplementary investigation may be requested from the Serious Crime Investigation Agency instead of the police.

The prosecutor’s authority to request corrective action has also been strengthened. Even before a case is transferred, if a prosecutor identifies improper investigation by an investigative agency, the prosecutor may receive the case from the judicial police officer and transfer it to another investigative agency. Additionally, judicial police officers are required to send the prosecutor a list of documents, records, and materials obtained during the investigation for cases not forwarded for prosecution.

Moreover, provisions for sanctions have been strengthened and reorganized so that if a judicial police officer fails to comply without justifiable reason with a prosecutor’s legitimate request for supplementary investigation, corrective action, or reinvestigation, disciplinary measures can be imposed.

To protect complainants and victims, not only suspects but also complainants, victims, or their legal representatives can directly report to the prosecutor if improper investigation is suspected. The prosecutor may then request corrective action regarding the case or transfer it to another investigative agency. The prosecutor must notify the complainant of actions taken and their results.

The scope of objections to non-prosecution decisions will also be expanded. Not only complainants but also accusers will be allowed to file objections. In addition, when a prosecutor requests a reinvestigation from a judicial police officer regarding a non-prosecution case, the prosecutor must inform the complainant, victim, and others of the request. This is intended to ensure that complainants and victims are aware of and able to respond to the progress of investigations.

The Criminal Procedure Act TF stated, "The amendment encompasses not only the adjustment of investigative authority between police and prosecutors but also strengthening the oversight and checks on investigative agencies, and protecting complainants and victims. We will work to ensure that the amendment is swiftly and thoroughly reviewed by the Legislation and Judiciary Committee so that the Public Prosecutors’ Office Act and the Serious Crime Investigation Agency Act can be implemented without delay, and to create investigative and judicial systems that benefit the public."

Haesik Lee, a Democratic Party lawmaker and member of the Criminal Procedure Act TF, told reporters after the proposal was submitted, "One of the key measures to check the strengthened police authority is the ‘substantialization of the Police Commission.’" He added, "As a long-term task, we should work toward decentralizing much of the police’s authority through the introduction of an autonomous police system."

The newly proposed amendment to the Criminal Procedure Act will be reviewed together with two previously submitted amendments in a consolidated review at the first subcommittee of the Legislation and Judiciary Committee at 10 a.m. on July 10. Assemblyman Seungwon Kim, the Democratic Party’s secretary of the committee, said, "We plan to hold subcommittee meetings one or two times a week for a prompt review." The Democratic Party has announced its intention to process the bill regardless of the party convention scheduled for next month.

Hankyu Kim, the Democratic Party’s Deputy Floor Leader for Policy, addressed concerns that the recent Jang Yunki case demonstrates the need for supplementary investigation authority, stating, "The Jang Yunki case occurred despite the existence of the supplementary investigation authority. Keeping the supplementary investigation authority will not prevent such cases from happening." He went on to say, "The important thing is to prevent cases by blocking the involvement of interested parties in investigations at the police level."

Kim also responded to concerns that requests for supplementary investigation could delay investigations by saying, "The only change is that the main body of the investigation will shift from the prosecutor to the judicial police officer, so I do not expect any delays." He added, "On the contrary, by specifying a one-month period for supplementary investigation requests, investigations can proceed more swiftly."

This amendment was submitted in the name of the Democratic Party’s leadership group.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.