Special Investigation on the Internal Rebellion by Jo Eun-seok, the Pros and Cons of Speed Race... The Task of Restoring Trust and the Structure of Dependency on the Prosecution

Introduction - Fast Preparation Speed, Yet Doubts Raised from the Start

The special prosecutor, Cho Eun-seok, who was appointed in early June to investigate former President Yoon Suk-yeol's allegations of insurrection and foreign exchange violations, has been earning attention for his "swift preparations" even before the investigation began. He has set up a temporary office at the Seoul Eastern District Prosecutors' Office and requested the dispatch of nine high-ranking prosecutors, some of whom have already begun their work, and he is waiting for the president's appointment of eight candidates for special prosecutor assistants. Although the official investigation is set to start after relocating the office to the Seoul High Prosecutors' Office, the quick actions taken prior to the start of the investigation have sparked both expectations and concerns regarding the special prosecutor's inquiry. Especially considering the gravity of the investigation's targets and the political nature of the case, the organization and initial movements of the special prosecutor are becoming a test of national trust in itself.

Investigation Preparation Process: A Practical Focused Strategy of 'Speed War'

The Special Prosecutor Jo seems to be focusing on practical preparations, being aware of the need to differentiate itself from past special prosecutors that were embroiled in political investigation controversies, and is dedicating itself to organizational restructuring and infrastructure development. As for the prosecutor composition: a request has been made to dispatch nine senior prosecutors, some of whom have already begun official duties since June 17. Regarding the appointment of special prosecutors: eight candidates have been recommended, and the president will appoint up to six from among them. Office space acquisition: preparations are currently underway in a temporary office at the Seoul Eastern District Prosecutors' Office, and a relocation to the Seoul High Prosecutors' Office is being pursued soon. In terms of strategic non-disclosure: the team is refraining from mentioning anything about the subjects or direction of the investigation and is concentrating on consolidating its capabilities as an investigative body. This approach by Special Prosecutor Jo can be interpreted as a commitment to the original purpose of the special prosecution system, focusing on securing a practical foundation rather than delivering a political message. However, this very strategy focused on practicality is raising structural questions.

Allegations and Criticism: Two Structural Issues

The initial steps of the special investigation team led by Cho appear to be swift and refined, but two significant structural issues are being raised simultaneously in the process. (1) Possible structural ties with the prosecution – a crisis of the premise of independent investigation. The first issue arises from the dependency structure on the prosecution, stemming from the physical and human composition of the special investigation team. The special investigation team currently has a temporary office within the Seoul Eastern District Prosecutors' Office, and all dispatched prosecutors are from the existing prosecution. Although they are supposed to switch their status to that of the special investigation team once dispatched according to the Special Investigation Act, the overlap in physical space and personnel pathways during the early stages of the investigation inevitably creates the possibility of direct and indirect contact with the prosecution. This structure cannot avoid the fundamental question of whether the special investigation team is indeed an independent investigative body from the prosecution. Especially in situations where the direction of the investigation or the sharing of information is ambiguous, trust in the independence of the special investigation team can be rapidly undermined. (2) Political suspicion of the special investigation team as a tool for restoring the prosecution's status. The second issue is the concern that this special investigation team might be used as a political tool to restore the status of the prosecution. Recently, the prosecution has faced allegations regarding political neutrality and controversies over investigative bias. At this juncture, if high-profile political events such as insurrection are handled through a special investigation team, it raises the analysis that “the prosecution is trying to circumvent direct investigation due to political burdens by using the special investigation team.” If the special investigation yields some results, it could indirectly restore the prosecution's planning capability and investigative power. Despite the neutrality and gravitas of Cho as an individual, the frame of 'a special investigation team for the prosecution' is already shared among some in the political sphere and civil society.

The stance and attitude that Special Prosecutor Cho Eun-seok should adopt right now

The special prosecutor, Jo Eun-seok, must address these allegations and structural questions with a clear and resolute attitude even before the investigation begins. Regardless of the outcome of the investigation, the 'credibility of the process' is the very basis for the existence of the special prosecution system. (1) Declaration of information blockade. It should be made clear that the dispatched prosecutors will not share any information with the prosecution, and if necessary, security protocols and controls should be publicly explained. (2) Accelerating spatial separation. Plans for moving the office to the Seoul High Prosecutors' Office should be clearly articulated, and physical independence from the prosecution must be proven with accompanying access control and monitoring systems. (3) Ensuring transparency in personnel standards. The criteria for appointing special prosecutor assistants and operational staff should be clearly defined, and the process should be explained to the public regarding political neutrality and independence from the prosecution. (4) Establishing a public communication strategy. A regular briefing system should be established to transparently communicate organizational operations and procedural matters unrelated to the investigation, thereby building public trust.

Conclusion - Investigative methods are more important than the subjects of investigation, and the sincerity of the special investigation team starts now.

Special Prosecutor Jo Eun-seok has received high praise for the organization and preparation speed even before the investigation began. However, this special investigation, which deals with politically significant issues such as insurrection and foreign exchange, sees the 'reliability of the process' as a key evaluation criterion as much as the results. The temporary office within the prosecutor's office and the personnel dispatched from the prosecutor's office are not merely practical convenience issues they are directly related to the essential value that the public assigns to the special prosecutor system — 'independence from the prosecution.' Therefore, building trust through transparent procedures and a clear attitude before the start of the investigation will be both the first success of this special prosecution and the prosecutor's most important duty. What is needed now is not a strategy for the investigation, but a 'language of sincerity' that proves to the public why the special prosecutor system should exist. The public is already paying attention to how Special Prosecutor Jo Eun-seok will write that first sentence.