"'DMZ Mine Blast' Probe Also Goes Back and Forth"... Signs of Police-SCIA-CIO 'Ping-Pong'

President Lee Accused of General Treason and Other Offenses
Jurisdictional Confusion Persisted Until the Day Before the Complainant's Interview
"Jurisdictional Disputes Can Lead to Evidence Destruction and Secondary Harm"

Police abruptly reversed course after attempting to postpone questioning of the complainant in a case involving a landmine explosion in the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ). The confusion arose after they launched an investigation without first resolving jurisdictional issues between investigative agencies. Critics say unnecessary confusion is emerging because the system for coordinating investigations has not been properly established since the Serious Crimes Investigation Agency (SCIA) was launched.

Based on reporting by The Asia Business Daily on October 20, the Security Investigation Division 2 of the Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency asked the complainant on October 15 to postpone questioning, which had been scheduled for the following day, in a complaint case related to the DMZ landmine explosion. The agency said it was unclear whether the case fell under police jurisdiction, as President Lee Jae-myung and military leadership had been accused of crimes including aiding the enemy. After consulting separately with the SCIA and the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials (CIO) on jurisdiction, the police informed the complainant again, about an hour and 20 minutes later, that questioning would proceed as scheduled.

The sudden disruption to the questioning schedule was triggered by media reports that a similar case, in which President Lee was accused of aiding the enemy, had been assigned to the SCIA. After seeing the reports, the police concluded that this case should also be transferred to the SCIA and only then began reviewing jurisdiction. Crimes related to insurrection and treason, including aiding the enemy, fall within the SCIA's investigative scope. At the same time, because a sitting president and active-duty military personnel were among those accused, the case could also fall under the CIO's jurisdiction.

The SCIA, however, concluded that it was not required to be notified because the complaint in the case was filed before the agency opened. The CIO said it would continue to review whether the case fell under its jurisdiction, but conveyed that the police could proceed with the investigation in the meantime. The complainant said, "The police failed to determine in advance whether they could even investigate the case, causing unnecessary confusion," adding, "I suspect they may have intended to avoid or pass off the investigation because a sitting president was among those accused."

The concern is that investigative disorder could worsen in future cases where agencies' jurisdictions overlap. The current enforcement decree of the SCIA Act sets out procedures and criteria for notifying agencies about cases and transferring them, but the rules may be interpreted differently by each agency. Critics say confusion is inevitable if agencies cannot even determine in advance whether a case must be reported, as happened this time. A consultative body to resolve jurisdictional disputes between agencies is not scheduled to begin operating until February 2027, leaving them reliant on working-level consultations in the meantime.

If securing evidence is delayed or an investigation is prolonged as a case moves between investigative agencies, the people involved in the case will bear the full consequences. Lee Chang-hyun, a professor at Hankuk University of Foreign Studies Law School, said, "While jurisdiction is being coordinated, investigators may find it difficult to pursue the case with commitment, and the risk of suspects destroying evidence also increases." He added, "Since the people involved in the case bear all the consequences, the principle should be that the agency that first receives a case continues the investigation, and if another agency requests a transfer, a decision should be made without delay."

Investigative agencies are also discussing jurisdiction over cybercrimes targeting government computer networks or critical national infrastructure. Frontline agencies face a greater burden in making decisions, as they must also determine the applicable criteria based on the type of case and when it was received. An official at the Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency said, "On jurisdictional issues, the police and the SCIA are each conducting their own reviews based on the cases they have received, while working-level officials are also consulting at the headquarters level." The official added, "Interpretations of the crimes covered have been changing gradually in recent days, and related work instructions are being circulated." The official explained, "Because the SCIA or the CIO has priority in cases within its jurisdiction, we have no choice but to review whether a case falls within that jurisdiction."

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