Opposition Blocks UNDP Attempt to Impeach Prosecutors Prosecutors Slam UNDP Impeachment Bill Prosecutor Impeachment Bill Submitted to Parliament

The UNDP claimed prosecutors failed to investigate suspected infractions by presidential candidate Lee Myung-bak, who it says is the actual owner of real estate in Dogok Dong and firms implicated in a stock scam, DAS and BBK. The UNDP claims also that prosecutors tried to hide or tamper with evidence, while ignoring the Constitution and the rule of law by making it appear as if Korean American businessman Kim Kyung-joon was solely responsible for the alleged crimes. The UNDP claimed prosecutors had told Kim they could not indict Lee and that doing so would be detrimental to their welfare. The UNDP also claimed that prosecutors forced Kim to cut a deal in exchange for a lighter sentence of just three years. The UNDP claims that prosecutors had abused their power, tampered with evidence and hid the truth in violation of Korean laws.

To shed light on the suspicions involving BBK, a special team of prosecutors spent almost a month combing through hundreds of bank accounts both in Korea and abroad and investigated dozens of witnesses and references. In order to verify the authenticity of an under-the-table contract Kim’s family falsely claimed was signed by Lee, prosecutors mobilized ample scientific and forensic equipment, while questioning Lee in writing. To allay suspicions of cutting a deal with or threatening Kim in obtaining his testimony, prosecutors recorded, in audio and video formats, the entire questioning sessions involving the businessman, while his lawyer was also present at each moment. Prosecutors said it was Kim who first raised the option of a lighter sentence in exchange for new information.

Before they submitted an impeachment bill, the UNDP should have first pointed out just what flaws there may have been in the investigation. The UNDP has the options of presenting its objections to the Seoul High Public Prosecutor’s Office or to the Supreme Public Prosecutor’s Office or to raise such objections during a court trial. But taking out the impeachment card simply because it is unhappy with the results of the investigation reeks of purely political intentions to sway voters away from Lee.

The incumbent prosecutor general may become the subject of investigation if an independent counsel is appointed to probe allegations of the Samsung Group having bribed judges and prosecutors for favors. But the UNDP raised no objections when the president nominated such an official for that position. Rather, it joined the GNP, heaped praises upon praises on that official during a National Assembly confirmation hearing. And when the president, who used to be a member of their own party, authorized the investigation of the BBK scandal, the UNDP also gave its consent.

The probe was led by the prosecutor general, who the UNDP deliberately went soft on during the appointment hearing, to gain his cooperation in swaying the investigation results in favor of the ruling camp. That didn’t work, so now the UNDP has raised the impeachment card, which smells of political intentions. Even the presidential office is taking a wait-and-see attitude, saying an incumbent prosecutor should only be impeached if he or she commits critical wrongdoing in an investigation. Things have come to a pretty pass when even the presidential office questions whether the suspicions raised by the UNDP at this point are worthy of an impeachment bill.