Irrefutable CCTV, Eroded Court Authority... The Double-Edged Sword of Live Broadcasts [One Year Since December 3 Martial Law]

Following the 12·3 Martial Law, the stage for accountability regarding the three major special prosecutor cases-insurrection, Kim Keonhee, and the death of a Marine in the line of duty-has shifted from investigation to prosecution, sentencing requests, and verdicts in the first trial, moving the battleground to the courts. With the National Assembly’s revision of the Special Prosecutor Act, the era of "YouTube live broadcasts of insurrection criminal trials" has begun. Citizens now have the opportunity to witness, in real time on their smartphones, the process in which records, evidence, and testimonies from the first trial on insurrection are revealed.

원본보기 아이콘

The power of public trials became immediately apparent. During the insurrection trial of former Prime Minister Han Ducksoo, CCTV footage from the presidential office’s main reception room was released, and scenes of Han reading the martial law document were played directly on the courtroom screen. Although Han testified at the Constitutional Court that he had never received the document, the video served as a smoking gun that contradicted his statement. The special prosecutor requested a 15-year prison sentence for him. The question, "What happened on December 3?" was answered in real time in the courtroom broadcast.

However, "full live broadcasting" has also led to side effects that undermine the authority and procedures of the court. Raw footage from the courtroom has been edited into one-minute shorts, resulting in statements being consumed out of context and sometimes misinterpreted. Some judges have even become the subject of character fandoms. Judge Lee Jinkwan, for example, has gained a following as a "firm judge," while Presiding Judge Ji Guyoun, who maintained a neutral approach, has been criticized as "lightweight" or even mocked.

원본보기 아이콘

Conflicts outside the courtroom have escalated into actual disputes over courtroom order. During Han’s trial, when the defense attorneys for former Defense Minister Kim Yonghyun refused to comply with an order to leave and caused a disturbance, they were detained. Afterwards, they continued to criticize the court on YouTube. The National Court Administration ultimately filed charges of contempt of court and defamation against them. While public trials can serve as a monitoring mechanism, the moment they become material for content attacking the court, concerns about the erosion of procedural authority become a reality.

Yonhap News Agency

원본보기 아이콘

Special prosecutor teams that have not yet concluded their investigations continue to grapple with a mountain of unresolved suspicions. With the exception of the special prosecutor investigating the death of the Marine in the line of duty, which ended its investigation on the 28th of last month, both the Kim Keonhee and insurrection special prosecutor teams are approaching a critical juncture. Special Prosecutor Cho Eonseok’s team is set to conclude its investigation on the 14th of this month. The key issue is whether an arrest warrant will be issued for former People Power Party floor leader Chu Kyungho, who is accused of obstructing party members from participating in the vote to lift martial law. The warrant hearing is scheduled for the 2nd, and if issued, the investigation could expand to the broader People Power Party. If dismissed, the insurrection special prosecutor’s investigation into political circles will effectively end, shifting focus to maintaining the prosecution's case in court.

The insurrection special prosecutor team has reportedly determined that former President Yoon Sukyeol, First Lady Kim Keonhee, and former Justice Minister Park Sungjae form a "political community of shared fate" and is investigating suspicions that Park intervened in the prosecution’s investigation. However, since Kim is only a reference witness, compulsory investigation is difficult, and related cases are likely to be transferred to the Kim Keonhee special prosecutor team. A decision is also expected soon regarding the judicial handling of former Prime Minister Hwang Kyoahn, who is accused of inciting insurrection.

Many key suspicions remain unresolved as the Kim Keonhee special prosecutor’s investigation deadline approaches on the 28th. These include the alleged sale of official positions involving Kim, and the alleged preferential treatment in the Yangpyeong Gongheung District development project. Progress has been made on the Gongheung District case, but the involvement of higher-level officials has yet to be clarified. In connection with the Yangpyeong Gongheung District preferential treatment allegations, the special prosecutor recently summoned Kim Sunghyo, a People Power Party lawmaker, who, as Yangpyeong County Governor from 2011 to 2016, is suspected of granting special favors such as exemption from development charges to Kim’s family during their development project. Although the police have already investigated this case and decided not to refer it for prosecution, unless the Kim Keonhee special prosecutor team secures a smoking gun, it will be difficult to overturn the police’s decision.

However, there is relatively concrete evidence supporting the allegations that Kim received luxury necklaces, watches, and gold turtles in exchange for influencing official appointments. The special prosecutor summoned Kim on the 4th of last month, and former President Yoon has also been notified to appear on the 17th. Decisions regarding the disposition of those who provided the valuables will be made after both individuals have been questioned.

© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.