Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-yeol filed a lawsuit today (4th) stating that the Prosecutors' Disciplinary Law, which led to the formation of the Prosecutors' Discipline Committee, was unconstitutional.
We also applied for a temporary injunction requesting that the disciplinary committee process be suspended until it is determined whether it is unconstitutional.
In a statement sent to reporters today, Mr. Yun's lawyer Wan-gyu Lee filed a constitutional appeal to the Constitutional Court, saying, "Article 5, Paragraph 2, No. 2 and 3 of the Prosecutor's Discipline Act violates the Constitution as long as it applies to the disciplinary action of the Prosecutor General." It has been stated that it has filed an application for provisional injunction with suspension of effect.
Article 5, Paragraph 2 of the Prosecutors' Discipline Act is a provision specifying the composition of prosecutors and disciplinary members excluding the chairperson.
General Yoon's side questioned Nos. 2 and 3, which clarified the basis for the composition of the remaining members except for the Minister and Vice Minister of Justice.
Article 5, paragraphs 2 and 3 of the Prosecutor's Disciplinary Act include two prosecutors appointed by the Minister and three persons with knowledge and expertise, and five disciplinary members excluding the minister and the vice minister. Configuration.
General Yoon said, "The Minister of Justice can appoint and appoint most of the disciplinary members along with the disciplinary request and constitute a majority of the disciplinary members. If the Minister makes a disciplinary request and the Prosecutor General becomes a disciplinary suspect, fairness can be guaranteed at all. "No."
He criticized that "this provision is designed to deprive the Prosecutor General of the prosecutor general who was subject to disciplinary duties in a manner that could seriously harm the fairness of the disciplinary committee beyond the reasonable scope of legislative formation."
It is that it exceeds the legislative limit of the restriction of basic rights set by Article 37, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution.
Yoon also pointed out that it lacked appropriateness and fairness, which are important principles in the due process, allowing disciplinary claimants to nominate the majority of disciplinary members.
He stressed that it does not fit the judicial principle that separates prosecution from judgment.
Yoon's side also applied for a temporary injunction to suspend the validity of the provisions of the Prosecutor's Disciplinary Act, which filed a constitutional complaint, until it is decided whether it is unconstitutional or not.
It means that the disciplinary committee should not be held until a constitutional decision is made.
Yoon's constitutional appeal was aimed directly at the issue of bias in the formation of the disciplinary committee that was pointed out during this disciplinary process.
The fact that the disciplinary authority, Minister Chu, in fact, can lead the formation of the disciplinary committee, served as the main background of the median disciplinary outlook.
Some analysts say that when President Moon Jae-in postponed the disciplinary committee yesterday while emphasizing the guarantee of'procedural legitimacy and fairness' at the disciplinary committee, President Yoon's side raised the level of offensive and took the lead.