[Report file] "The Airborne Service weakens its function by putting the 'prosecution reform' at the fore."

On the morning of the 21st, the first year since the establishment of the Crime Investigation Office for Senior Officials.

Kim Jin-wook, director of the Air Transport Department, who was going to work at the government office, stood in front of reporters for a moment with an iron gate in between.

Director Kim said, "We will reorganize our organization and system to meet the needs of the people."

However, why is the 'closed' iron gate placed between Director Kim and the reporters more noticeable?

Although the Airborne Service had decided to quietly hold the first anniversary event internally without an outsider's invitation, the 'closed' iron gate was enough to show the reality of the Airborne Service, which was quite different from the one year ago, when the inauguration ceremony was held in a noisy way.

The issuance rate of arrest warrants and arrest warrants was 0%, and there were 0 direct prosecutions.

Following the criticism of the lack of investigative capacity, from the end of last year, there was a controversy over indiscriminate inquiry into civilian communications.

Due to this situation, criticism is high not only among those who have opposed the establishment of the Airborne Service, but also among those who have actively supported it.

Han Sang-hee, a professor at the Graduate School of Law at Konkuk University, is one of the most influential figures in the establishment of the Ministry of Airlift.

Professor Han served as the director of the Judicial Surveillance Center at the Solidarity for Participation in Participation, and has led the movement to establish the Airborne Service for 16 years since 2005.

One such professor also met with a SBS reporter and said, "The last year of the Ministry of Airlift and Security has almost failed."

"Public Public Service, 'prosecution reform' rather than investigation... The function of 'punishment of high-ranking officials' is weakened"

The air transport system is an agenda that has been discussed in our society for nearly 20 years.

Originally, the Airborne Service was first talked about as an organization that properly investigates and punishes high-ranking public officials for corruption and power-type crimes.

Then, under the Moon Jae-in administration, prosecutorial reform emerged as an important social issue, and the role of checking and controlling the prosecution power was added as an axis of the reform of the prosecution service to the purpose of the existence of the Airborne Service.

The problem is that the slogan of excessively reforming the prosecution came to the fore in the process of establishing and operating the Airborne Service, and the problem of high-ranking public officials’ crimes, which must be jointly punished by state agencies that need to establish judicial justice, is the confrontational relationship between the two organizations, the Airborne Service and the Prosecutor’s Office. has been replaced with

As a result, the function of the airlifting station was greatly weakened.

Strictly speaking, the Airborne Service, along with the prosecution and the police, should be such an organization that combats power-type crimes of high-ranking public officials.

By putting the reform of the prosecution in the forefront of the function of the Airborne Service, it is endowed with this characteristic as an organization that controls the power of the prosecution while confronting the prosecution. This is the kind of situation that the airlift station cannot use.

The functionality of the airlifting station or the efficiency of the work resulted in a result that was significantly lower than expected.

"An anti-human rights investigation, such as indiscriminate inquiry into communication data, requires serious reflection"

The Minister of Airborne Affairs was right when he said that he would make the investigations of the Airborne Service human rights-friendly.

However, I don't want to give such a good score to whether the Airborne Service conducted a human rights-friendly investigation.

In fact, human rights-friendly investigations do not disclose the facts of the suspect or keep the process of summoning the suspect a secret. It can be said that investigations are conducted in the process of properly exercising their defense rights in a system that is human rights-friendly.

However, if you look at the investigations conducted by the Air Airborne Service so far, forced investigations such as arrest warrants, arrest warrants, and search and seizure warrants accounted for most of the investigation. I'm worried if I'm getting it or not.

Searching for communication data extensively and using it for investigation is the most anti-human rights investigation technique that the prosecution or the police have continued.

If the Ministry of Public Security is an organization proposed as a means of reforming the prosecution, it should have developed and implemented investigative techniques that boldly shake off the anti-human rights investigation practices that the prosecution has been doing, but it failed to do so.

The Airborne Service should seriously reflect on this and should have an opportunity to explain to the public why it did so.

"We need to give time to the airborne police... we need to increase the number of investigative personnel and cooperate with the police and prosecutors"

After the establishment of the Airborne Service, it should take about a year or two to learn investigative techniques, create new investigative techniques, and have a kind of maturity of composing an investigation system that responds to the functions and roles of the Airlift Service. Without further ado, he jumped into the investigation. Investigative power is not built overnight, is it? There will be parts that you have to learn during the investigation process from time to time, and in some cases, there is a way to learn the best investigative techniques through trial and error. But the problem is that the Airborne Service did not have such time now. In such a situation, as we are dealing with a politically sensitive case, we are in a situation where we cannot but fall into an impatience that we have to get results. I think we need to give the airlift a little more time.

Also, the Airborne Service, which consists of 25 investigative prosecutors, cannot investigate all power-type crimes. Power-type crime requires a lot of manpower to secure evidence in a short time, but the number of investigative prosecutors currently is too small. As the law is amended in the direction of increasing the number of manpower, it is reasonable to establish a framework to control the possible abuse of the investigative prosecutor's authority by using a check between other investigative agencies.

What is more important is to form such an organic relationship between the Airborne Service and the police and prosecutors.

In the case of the UK, there are several investigative agencies, and whenever the head of the agency takes office, they consult with each other, and the results of the consultation are left in a memorandum.

It seems that the system of receiving the cooperation of the police and prosecutors in investigating certain crimes has not been established until the first year since our establishment.

It is also very important to secure a cooperative system between the prosecution and the police in order for the Airborne Service to become a more effective investigative body.