A Study on the Procedural Control of Police

Oung-Seok Jeong
{"title":"A Study on the Procedural Control of Police","authors":"Oung-Seok Jeong","doi":"10.34222/kdps.2022.14.4.31","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"With the inauguration of the Yoon Seok-ryul government, discussions on police reform are hot. The core of this can be seen as the establishment of a so-called “police station” within the Ministry of Public Administration and Security, and the reason why the establishment of a police station became a key task in the Yoon Seok-ryul government is that control of the police has been raised as police investigation rights have expanded. Accordingly, Minister of Public Administration and Security Lee Sang-min launched the Police System Improvement Advisory Committee (hereinafter abbreviated as the Advisory Committee), established a police station in the Ministry of Public Administration and Security according to the advisory committee’s recommendation, and the police station was launched on August 2, 2022. Regarding the launch of the police station, there is constant controversy over whether “security” is the secretary of the Ministry of Public Administration and Security, and Article 34 (5) of the Government Organization Act stipulates security affairs as the National Police Agency, but it is not separately stipulated in the duties of the Minister of Public Administration and Security. \nHowever, through the revision of the Criminal Procedure Act and the Prosecutor’s Office Act in 2020, the prosecution’s command of investigation was abolished, and the scope of direct investigation was limited to six crimes, and reduced to two crimes (0.4%) through the revision in 2022. According to this, the judicial police have the right to initiate and proceed with the investigation of 99.6% cases and terminate the investigation, so a new interpretation of the police’s investigation work is needed. As a result, the Minister of Justice and the Minister of Public Administration and Security were forced to review the final attribution of the police investigation, and eventually appeared as a consultative office for the enactment of the Presidential Decree, which stipulates the investigation rules under Article 196 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act. This is because Article 66 (Presidential Status/Responsibility) (4) stipulates that “administrative power belongs to the government” and Article 88 (Power/Composition of the State Council) (1) stipulates that “the State Council deliberates on important policies under the authority of the government”. \nHowever, no matter what judicial system is followed, the criminal justice system is directly related to the rights and interests of the people in the process of realizing the national criminal right, and it is difficult to correct it if it is incompletely designed due to the nature of the system. The problem is that although the Criminal Procedure Act was revised in the name of judicial reform, much of the case was granted to judicial police officers, ignoring the reality of Korea being investigated by judicial police officers, which is a modified structure different from the continental and Anglo-American judicial systems. \nIn the end, it is necessary to revise the Criminal Procedure Act with the police and the prosecutor’s system, and if necessary, reform should be carried out in a way that restores the prosecution’s (quasi) judicial character through the separation of the prosecutor’s (direct) investigation and the prosecution’s an investigative command.","PeriodicalId":384688,"journal":{"name":"The Korean Association of Criminal Procedure Law","volume":"25 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Korean Association of Criminal Procedure Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34222/kdps.2022.14.4.31","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

With the inauguration of the Yoon Seok-ryul government, discussions on police reform are hot. The core of this can be seen as the establishment of a so-called “police station” within the Ministry of Public Administration and Security, and the reason why the establishment of a police station became a key task in the Yoon Seok-ryul government is that control of the police has been raised as police investigation rights have expanded. Accordingly, Minister of Public Administration and Security Lee Sang-min launched the Police System Improvement Advisory Committee (hereinafter abbreviated as the Advisory Committee), established a police station in the Ministry of Public Administration and Security according to the advisory committee’s recommendation, and the police station was launched on August 2, 2022. Regarding the launch of the police station, there is constant controversy over whether “security” is the secretary of the Ministry of Public Administration and Security, and Article 34 (5) of the Government Organization Act stipulates security affairs as the National Police Agency, but it is not separately stipulated in the duties of the Minister of Public Administration and Security. However, through the revision of the Criminal Procedure Act and the Prosecutor’s Office Act in 2020, the prosecution’s command of investigation was abolished, and the scope of direct investigation was limited to six crimes, and reduced to two crimes (0.4%) through the revision in 2022. According to this, the judicial police have the right to initiate and proceed with the investigation of 99.6% cases and terminate the investigation, so a new interpretation of the police’s investigation work is needed. As a result, the Minister of Justice and the Minister of Public Administration and Security were forced to review the final attribution of the police investigation, and eventually appeared as a consultative office for the enactment of the Presidential Decree, which stipulates the investigation rules under Article 196 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act. This is because Article 66 (Presidential Status/Responsibility) (4) stipulates that “administrative power belongs to the government” and Article 88 (Power/Composition of the State Council) (1) stipulates that “the State Council deliberates on important policies under the authority of the government”. However, no matter what judicial system is followed, the criminal justice system is directly related to the rights and interests of the people in the process of realizing the national criminal right, and it is difficult to correct it if it is incompletely designed due to the nature of the system. The problem is that although the Criminal Procedure Act was revised in the name of judicial reform, much of the case was granted to judicial police officers, ignoring the reality of Korea being investigated by judicial police officers, which is a modified structure different from the continental and Anglo-American judicial systems. In the end, it is necessary to revise the Criminal Procedure Act with the police and the prosecutor’s system, and if necessary, reform should be carried out in a way that restores the prosecution’s (quasi) judicial character through the separation of the prosecutor’s (direct) investigation and the prosecution’s an investigative command.
警察程序控制研究
随着尹锡烈政府的上台,有关警察改革的讨论正在升温。其核心是在行政安全部内部设立所谓的“警察署”,而设立警察署之所以成为尹锡烈政府的核心课题,是因为随着警察调查权的扩大,警察的控制力也随之提高。因此,行政安全部长官李相民成立了警察制度改善咨询委员会(以下简称咨询委员会),并根据咨询委员会的建议,在行政安全部设立了警察局,并于2022年8月2日正式成立。就设立警察厅一事,一直以来围绕“保安”是不是行政安全部秘书官的争议不断,而且《政府组织法》第34条第5款规定保安事务为警察厅,但在行政安全部长官的职责中却没有单独规定。但是,通过2020年的刑事诉讼法和检察法修改案,检察机关的调查指挥权被废除,直接调查的范围被限制在6种犯罪,并通过2022年的修改案减少到2种犯罪(0.4%)。据此,在99.6%的案件中,司法警察有权发起和继续调查,有权终止调查,因此需要对警察的调查工作进行新的解读。因此,法务部部长和行政安全部部长不得不对警方调查的最终归属进行审查,并最终以制定《刑事诉讼法》第196(2)条规定的调查规则的总统令的协商机构的身份出现。这是因为第66条(总统地位/职责)(4)规定“行政权力属于政府”,第88条(国务院权力/组成)(1)规定“国务院在政府授权下审议重要政策”。但是,无论遵循何种司法制度,刑事司法制度在实现国家刑事权利的过程中,都直接关系到人民群众的权益,由于制度的性质,如果设计不完整,就很难加以纠正。问题是,虽然以司法改革的名义修改了《刑事诉讼法》,但大部分案件都交给了司法警察,而忽略了与欧洲大陆和英美司法制度不同的司法结构的“韩国被司法警察调查”的现实。最后,有必要与警察和检察官制度一起修改《刑事诉讼法》,必要时应通过检察官(直接)调查和检察机关的调查指挥权分离,恢复检察机关的(准)司法性质。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信