[Reporter’s Notebook] Everyone Followed the Law, but Victims Alone Pay the Price

Victims who believe police investigations fell short

bring new evidence to the Public Prosecution Office, but

it cannot be used as evidence at trial

and are told, "Submit it to the police again"

Victims left without direction... foreseeable confusion

In Franz Kafka's novel The Trial, a man spends his entire life waiting before the “Gate of the Law.” He tries to enter, but the doorkeeper tells him that he cannot come in just yet. He waits and waits, but in the end, he never crosses the threshold.

Since the new criminal justice system was launched on October 2, 2026, similar scenes have been unfolding on the ground. A victim who believes the police investigation was inadequate brings new evidence to the Public Prosecution Office. But the prosecutor tells the victim to submit it to the police again, because materials received directly by the prosecutor cannot be used as evidence at trial.

The amended Criminal Procedure Act gives prosecutors the authority to hear the views of people involved in a case and receive materials from them, while prohibiting the use at trial of statements and materials obtained during the process of verifying facts. The aim is to prevent prosecutors from circumventing restrictions on their investigations. At the same time, however, the Public Prosecution Office has also been tasked with protecting victims and exercising subsequent oversight of police investigations. This creates a dysfunctional oversight structure that can only operate by relying on the very institution it is supposed to oversee.

No one has broken the law in this process. The police say they have already completed their investigation, while prosecutors are concerned about whether the evidence will be admissible. The court, too, must determine whether the evidence was submitted lawfully. Everyone is following the law in their respective roles, yet victims are the only ones forced to retrace the same steps. “Some victims eventually give up on submitting additional evidence,” said a senior prosecutor at a regional Public Prosecution Office. “The process takes two or three times longer, and victims end up being victimized again.”

The contradiction is also evident in other regulations. The Public Prosecution Office's Human Rights Protection Rules require that victims be given ample opportunity to submit evidence when a decision is made on whether to file charges. Whether the materials can actually be used at trial after they are received is a separate matter. Victims are left unsure where to turn amid rules that call for their protection and rules that restrict the use of evidence.

This confusion was foreseeable. During the bill's review in July 2026, the National Court Administration and the Ministry of Justice raised concerns about the nature of fact-finding and the admissibility of evidence. Now, interpretations and proposed solutions differ over how materials submitted after indictment should be handled and what standards should apply in practice. The Ministry of Justice has said it would consider legislative amendments if necessary, but victims on the ground still do not know which procedures to follow right now.

The police, prosecutors, and courts all say they have “followed the law.” At the Gate of the Law, victims are repeatedly told to try another door. It is the legislators' responsibility to ensure that people can actually get through one.

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