South Korea’s planned reorganization of its prosecution system is opening a new political confrontation as the Prosecution Service is replaced by a Public Prosecution Office and a Serious Crimes Investigation Agency. President Lee Jae Myung described the change as the end of a system in which prosecutors held both investigative and indictment powers, while the opposition People Power Party warned that the transition could create investigative confusion and gaps in public safety.
At a meeting with senior aides, Lee said the new structure was intended to introduce greater checks and balances into the criminal justice system. He presented the launch of the two agencies as the culmination of a long-running prosecution-reform agenda and said follow-up measures should prevent gaps in investigative capacity, fairness and victim protection.
The next argument shifts to police oversight
Lee also pointed to police reform as the next task. As police assume greater responsibility in the revised system, he called for stronger safeguards against concealed cases, investigative misconduct and other abuses. The administration’s challenge is therefore not only to redistribute authority but also to show that the new institutions can handle cases efficiently and under effective oversight.
The People Power Party offered the opposite assessment. About 70 lawmakers attended an outdoor parliamentary meeting near the Serious Crimes Investigation Agency, carrying signs criticizing the abolition of the former prosecution structure. Party leaders argued that splitting the system could damage investigative continuity and lead to public-safety problems.The opposition also announced a large rally in central Seoul for October 3. Its criticism turns the institutional transition into an immediate political test, with the government portraying the changes as a reform of concentrated prosecutorial power and the opposition portraying them as a risk to the functioning of criminal justice.
The practical measure of the new system will come after the agencies begin operating. Investigative speed, coordination between institutions, protection of crime victims and oversight of expanded police powers will show whether the transition produces the checks and balances promised by the government or the disruption feared by its critics.
