[Editorial] Prosecutor’s sex scandal

The prosecution is facing the worst crisis since its foundation. Last week, the arrest of a senior prosecutor at the Seoul High Prosecutors’ Office on corruption charges shook the powerful law enforcement agency to its foundations.

As if it were not enough, a dumbfounding sex scandal involving a novice prosecutor has been exposed, dealing a knockout punch to the already staggering agency. The prosecutor, who has been undergoing on-the-job training at a Seoul district prosecutor’s office since appointment in April, is alleged to have had sex with a theft suspect he had been questioning.

According to reports, the trainee prosecutor engaged in sexual acts with the suspect during questioning in his office on Nov. 10. Two days later, he had sex with her at a motel. The woman’s attorney claimed the prosecutor also had sex with her in his office on Nov. 10.

The theft suspect was quoted as telling the National Sexual Assault Counseling Center that she did as told by the prosecutor to avoid suffering disadvantages in the course of the investigation. She presented recordings of her conversations with the prosecutor as evidence.

Well aware of the explosive nature of the scandal, the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office rushed to probe the errant prosecutor. The SPO assigned the case to its own inspectors to save the time required to appoint a special team.

The inspectors then arrested the prosecutor without warrant Saturday, an unusual practice intended to speed up the investigation. It also demonstrated their resolve not to pull their punches in questioning him.

The prosecutor has been accused of bribery instead of sexual assault or abuse of power because, according to the inspectors, bribery carries a harsher punishment than the other two crimes. They explained that a prosecutor’s having sex with a woman suspect could be seen as receiving a bribe from her in return for clemency.

The SPO’s rush reflected its sense of crisis, which was heightened by last week’s arrest of the corrupt senior prosecutor, who was accused of, among other things, having received some 900 million won from a mid-sized conglomerate and the mastermind of a pyramid scheme in exchange for favors.

The long list of charges against him, mostly bribery and influence peddling, was shocking to his fellow prosecutors as well as the public. Many of his colleagues expressed their dismay and frustration over the unending series of corruption scandals involving prosecutors.

His case also led many prosecutors to acknowledge the need to reform the agency they have been working for ― a development that was unimaginable until only recently. Most prosecutors have adamantly resisted any reform in order to retain their almost unfettered power.

The sex scandal imparted added urgency to the task of reforming the unregulated prosecution. In the first place, the SPO needs to significantly toughen internal inspections of prosecutors to prevent them from engaging in corruption.

The behavior of the novice prosecutor suggests that many prosecutors have the perception that they are above the law and can get away with wrongdoing. This attitude stems partially from the absence of a system of checks and balances.

So it is necessary to set up an agency charged with investigation of corruption among prosecutors, lawmakers, presidential aides and relatives, and high-ranking government officials. This agency would put an end to the prosecution’s monopoly of the right to indict criminal suspects.

At the same time, it is also desirable to grant police more investigative power. Except for cases of great political, economic and social importance, prosecutors should refrain from questioning criminal suspects themselves and limit their role to supervising police investigators.

Far-reaching reform of the prosecution, however, will have to wait until the new government is launched in February. Whoever is elected as the next president will have to make prosecution reform a high priority.