Han Dong-soo’s Bold Call: Why Korea’s Prosecutorial Power Must Be Divided

Han Dong-soo’s Warning: Why Concentrated Prosecutorial Power Breeds Corruption

Did you know that in South Korea, the debate over the power of prosecutors is more heated than ever? On June 7, 2025, former Supreme Prosecutors’ Office Inspector General Han Dong-soo visited Gwangju and delivered a passionate lecture, emphasizing the dangers of unchecked prosecutorial authority. Han argued that when investigative and prosecutorial powers are concentrated in one institution, it inevitably leads to abuse and corruption. His remarks, covered by major news outlets, have reignited a nationwide conversation about how Korea’s legal system should evolve. Han’s perspective is especially significant, given his background at the heart of the prosecution. He insists that only by separating the powers of investigation and indictment can Korea protect human rights and prevent political manipulation.
Recent articles from Yonhap News, Newsis, and Chosun Ilbo highlight Han’s call for reform, noting that he referenced historical abuses and high-profile political cases. Han’s stance is not new, but his direct experience gives his words extra weight in a society where trust in legal institutions is often fragile.

The Structure of Korea’s Legal System: Why the Debate Matters

To understand Han Dong-soo’s call, it’s important to know how Korea’s current system works. Unlike many Western countries, South Korea’s prosecutors have both the power to investigate crimes and to indict suspects. This dual authority has been criticized for decades, with reformers arguing it creates opportunities for unchecked power and political interference. Han proposes a model where the police and a new investigative agency handle investigations, while a separate prosecution office is responsible only for indictments and trials. He also suggests that anti-corruption investigations should be managed by an independent body, such as the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials (CIO).
Articles from The Korea Herald and Hankyoreh explain that this model is inspired by post-revolutionary France, where separation of powers was seen as essential to prevent tyranny. Han points out that, outside of rare exceptions, most advanced democracies have adopted this separation. His critics, however, argue that Korea’s unique history and political landscape make such reforms risky or impractical.

Recent Cases Fueling the Reform Movement

Han Dong-soo’s arguments are not just theoretical. He points to several recent cases where concentrated prosecutorial power allegedly led to injustice. For example, he references the investigations into former presidents and political figures—cases that many in the public see as politically motivated. In his lecture, Han cited the prosecutions of Kim Dae-jung, Han Myeong-sook, and Lee Jae-myung, suggesting that these were less about justice and more about eliminating political rivals.
Major news outlets like JoongAng Ilbo and KBS have reported on public concern over such cases, with many citizens expressing frustration at the lack of transparency in prosecutorial decisions. The issue of special activity funds (used for covert investigations) and the secrecy surrounding case files have only added fuel to the fire. Han’s point is that without structural change, these problems will persist.

Community Reactions: Heated Debates on Online Forums

If you check out popular Korean online communities like DC Inside, Theqoo, Nate Pann, Instiz, Naver, Daum, FM Korea, and PGR21, you’ll find thousands of comments debating Han Dong-soo’s proposals. Some users strongly support his call for reform, arguing that Korea’s prosecutors have too much unchecked power and that separating investigative and prosecutorial functions is long overdue. Typical positive comments include: 'Finally, someone from inside the system is speaking out,' and 'We need transparency and accountability.'
On the other hand, many users are skeptical or outright opposed, saying: 'This will only make investigations slower and less effective,' or 'Politicians just want to weaken the prosecution to protect themselves.' The diversity of opinions reflects deep-seated mistrust in both the legal system and political elites. Blog posts on Naver and Tistory echo these sentiments, with some bloggers warning that reform could lead to unintended consequences, while others see it as a necessary step toward democracy.

Cultural Context: Why Prosecutorial Reform Is Such a Big Deal in Korea

For international readers, it’s important to understand the cultural and historical context behind this debate. Korea’s modern legal system was heavily influenced by its colonial past and the authoritarian governments of the 20th century. Prosecutors were often seen as tools of the state, used to suppress dissent and control political rivals. Even after democratization, the perception of prosecutors as powerful, sometimes unaccountable figures has persisted.
Reform advocates like Han Dong-soo argue that true democracy requires a legal system where no single institution has too much power. This resonates with younger Koreans, who are especially sensitive to issues of fairness and transparency. On the other hand, some older Koreans fear that weakening the prosecution could make it harder to fight corruption and organized crime. Understanding these generational and historical divides is key to grasping why this issue is so contentious.

Media and Blog Coverage: What Are People Really Saying?

A review of more than six recent news articles and six blog posts shows that the debate is everywhere. Newsis, Yonhap, and The Korea Times have all published in-depth analyses of Han’s proposals, often quoting both supporters and critics. On Naver and Tistory, bloggers share personal stories about encounters with the legal system, highlight international comparisons, and speculate about the political motives behind reform efforts.
Many bloggers praise Han for his courage in speaking out, while others question whether real change is possible given Korea’s entrenched legal culture. Some posts go viral, sparking heated discussions in the comments. The consensus? Koreans are divided, but almost everyone agrees that the current system needs more transparency and accountability.

Looking Ahead: What’s Next for Prosecutorial Reform in Korea?

So, what happens now? The debate sparked by Han Dong-soo shows no signs of fading. Lawmakers are under pressure to consider new legislation, and civil society groups are organizing forums and petitions. International observers are also watching closely, as Korea’s experience could influence reform movements in other countries.
For fans of Korean culture and politics, this is a moment worth following. The outcome will shape not only the legal system but also the broader struggle for democracy and justice in Korea. Whether you support Han’s vision or not, one thing is clear: the conversation about power, accountability, and reform is far from over.