개정 형사소송법 시행, 1년 유예를 제안한다 [왜냐면]

The proposed amendment to the Criminal Procedure Law, which involves revising the penal system, has been a subject of intense debate for over 30 years. While some argue for a definitive conclusion, others caution about the risks of rushing the process. The legitimacy and necessity of such changes, along with the anticipated negative consequences and societal costs, are subjects of heated discussion.

Unlike the replacement of the Public Prosecution Agency, this reform is not just a matter of preference or justification. Citizens are questioning whether the changed procedures and systems can function flawlessly in real-world scenarios. There are things that can be rectified and things that cannot. A new drug undergoes rigorous testing even after its development; similarly, the penal system cannot be replaced without thorough testing.

Developing a new system within just two months is not possible. There is no competent individual who can implement everything flawlessly in such a short period. The first month is physically impossible for correcting loopholes. In practice, this period is infeasible. The system operates not on willpower and justification, but on precise procedures and meticulous verification.

The criminal law amendment requires the replacement of 180 sub-laws for investigation guidelines and the reform of many laws related to investigative procedures. However, these have not yet been finalized. The National Specialized Investigation Agency (NSIA) is in the process of setting up new facilities, and the recruitment process is currently unclear.

The establishment of these new institutions will result in a significant lack of specialized personnel. If new organizations are responsible for handling nationwide high-profile cases, the investigation of these cases will undoubtedly come to a halt. Previous experiments in establishing a special task force (TF) for investigating two district-level cases took eight months to prepare, classify, and relocate evidence and records, as well as to minimize practical errors.

Even with this effort, it was only a fraction of the current scale. The process of transferring case numbers, seizure lists, and suspended investigation cases, which number in the hundreds of thousands, is fraught with risk. The division of cases between the police and the National Specialized Investigation Agency is another major issue.

Determining the appropriate criteria for classification and coordination between organizations takes considerable time. Even with adjustments and agreements, this massive task of transferring case records within a month and a half is a colossal national undertaking. Implementing procedures without prior testing could result in the loss of evidence, damage, and inadequate management, leading to situations where guilty individuals are arrested due to lack of evidence or procedural errors.

The reform's true success lies in its flawless execution in the field, not just in theory. If complacency leads to suffering for the public, the reform is deemed a failure and may be reversed. The remaining 40 days highlight the stark reality that a massive transformation is not feasible. The government and legislative bodies must acknowledge this cold reality and grant a minimum of one year's grace period for the amended Criminal Procedure Law.

During the initial few months, the procedures for the newly established organizations must be carefully designed, and the corresponding implementation regulations must be established. Afterward, the plans must be simulated to verify their practical feasibility. Only after this analysis and verification can the subsequent practical steps be taken.

Preparing for the establishment of new facilities, staffing, and reforming the Criminal Information System (KICS) is necessary, but no system is perfect. However, with proper preparation, the transition can be made with minimal disruption. At a time when voices are growing louder about the potential collapse of the national criminal justice system, this last opportunity exists to prevent a potential disaster.

The Public Prosecution Agency's dissolution should not delay the implementation of the amended Criminal Procedure Law.