검찰수사심의위원회의 문제점 및 개선방안 연구 = A Study on the Problems and Improvements of the Prosecution Investigation Review Committee

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The purpose of this study is to review the current status of the prosecution’s investigation review committee system, which was introduced in response to the demands of the times to establish democratic legitimacy and expand civic participation in the process of exercising the prosecution’s investigative power, and to present its limitations and improvement measures. In the investigation stage, which is an area where the right to national punishment is first invoked, procedural fairness and transparency are essential in that the basic rights of the people can be directly limited.
However, the prosecution has been distrusted by the public as it disposes of arbitrary, closed, and in some cases politically biased cases in the criminal justice system of prosecution monopoly and prosecution convenience. The Prosecution Investigation Deliberation Committee was introduced as an external control device to compensate for these problems, but structural limitations such as the absence of a legal basis for the establishment of the committee, the lack of fairness in selecting members, and the non-constitutionality of the deliberation results were revealed. The structural limitations of the Investigation Deliberation Committee, introduced as a democratic control body in the investigation stage, weakened the function of democratic control over the exercise of authority by the investigative agency and reduced the system’s civic participation character to a formal device.
Therefore, this study suggested that the legal basis for the establishment of the prosecution investigation review committee, securing neutrality and fairness in the composition of members through random draws, and giving practical binding force to the deliberation results. This will implement national sovereignty and direct democracy in the investigation stage, and take essential measures to strengthen the objectivity, transparency, and fairness of the investigation process. Through these improvements, the citizen participation system in the investigation stage can function as a practical democratic control device, not just an advisory body.