검찰 개혁은 기소권과 수사권을 독점하여 사건을 조작하고, 무고한 이를 죄인으로 만드는 등 국가 역량을 훼손해 온 집단에 대한 국민적 차원의 최소한의 방어 기제입니다. 만약 최대한의 대응을 했다면 그 악행의 당사자들을 척결했을 것입니다. 국민 안전을 위해 검찰이 필수적이라는 주장은 검찰지상주의적 시각이며, 검찰을 범죄시한다고 비판하는 것은 논점을 흐리는 행위입니다. 우리는 지금 제도의 허점을 악용하는 사례를 목격했기에, 그 제도를 수정하려는 것입니다.
검찰 스스로 개혁할 것이라는 기대는 노무현 대통령의 '검사와의 대화' 시절에 이미 유효기간이 끝났습니다. 박은정 의원 같은 극소수 예외를 제외하면, 검찰 출신 정치인들의 제 식구 감싸기를 볼 때 그들에게 기대를 접는 것이 합리적입니다. 따라서 검찰 관련 인사를 철저히 배제하고 기소·수사권 분리를 추진해야 합니다. 과거 국회에서 국민의 뜻에 따른 이러한 시도가 있었을 때, 검찰은 결국 '윤석열 검찰 공화국'을 탄생시켰고, 더 나아가 내란 계엄을 옹호했을 개연성마저 큽니다. 이런 상황에서 국민 안전 운운하는 것은 어불성설이며, 보완수사권 등의 문제는 제도를 시행한 뒤 추후 보완하면 될 일입니다.
또한, 검찰 개혁은 갑작스러운 이슈가 아닙니다. 당대표를 거쳐 국정 운영의 중심에 있는 인물이 개혁 의지를 천명했음에도, 오광수, 봉욱, 정성호 등 부적절한 인물을 주요 요직에 앉혀놓고 이제 와서 인적 쇄신을 논하는 것은 사후약방문 격입니다. 이것이 진정한 개혁 의지인지 의문이 듭니다.
골든 상 수상 소식은 SNS에 올리면서 개혁과 관련된 잡음을 모른다는 것은 납득하기 어렵습니다. 정성호 의원에게 "대신 맞느라 고생한다"라고 말한 것은 그의 행보를 용인한다는 의중을 드러낸 것입니다. 법사위에서 보인 정성호 의원의 답변을 보고도 그를 옹호하는 것은 이해의 범주를 넘어섭니다. 이혜훈은 중용하면서 최강욱, 조국, 박은정, 추미애 같은 인물들은 배제하는 것이 과연 정상적인 용인술입니까?
혹시라도 이후 지도부에서 전향적인 발언이 나온다면, 지지자들은 "거봐, 괜히 일을 키웠다"라며 안도할지 모릅니다. 그러나 세상은 침묵으로 바뀌지 않습니다. 세월호 참사 당시 "가만히 있으라"던 방송을 잊지 마십시오. 영웅 1인에게 의존하지 말고, 각자의 생각으로 치열하게 토론해야 합니다.
Reformasi kejaksaan adalah mekanisme pertahanan minimal tingkat nasional terhadap kelompok yang telah merusak kapasitas negara dengan memonopoli kekuasaan penuntutan dan penyelidikan, memanipulasi kasus, dan mengubah orang yang tidak bersalah menjadi penjahat. Jika kami telah merespons secara maksimal, kami akan telah memberantas para pelaku kejahatan tersebut. Klaim bahwa kejaksaan sangat penting untuk keselamatan rakyat adalah perspektif yang memprioritaskan kejaksaan, dan mengkritik dengan mengatakan kejaksaan dikriminalisasi adalah tindakan yang mengaburkan isu pokok. Karena kami sekarang telah menyaksikan kasus-kasus yang memanfaatkan celah dalam sistem, kami berusaha memperbaiki sistem tersebut.
Harapan bahwa kejaksaan akan mereformasi diri sendiri telah berakhir masa berlakunya sejak era 'Dialog dengan Jaksa' di zaman Presiden Roh Moo-hyun. Kecuali beberapa pengecualian langka seperti Anggota Dewan Perwakilan Park Eun-jung, adalah rasional untuk berhenti berharap pada mereka ketika melihat politisi dari kejaksaan melindungi keluarga mereka sendiri. Oleh karena itu, kami harus secara ketat mengecualikan personel terkait kejaksaan dan mendorong pemisahan kekuasaan penuntutan dan penyelidikan. Ketika ada upaya seperti itu di masa lalu sesuai keinginan rakyat di Majelis Nasional, kejaksaan pada akhirnya menciptakan 'Republik Kejaksaan Yoon Seok-yeol', dan lebih jauh lagi, ada kemungkinan besar mereka telah membela hukum darurat untuk pemberontakan. Dalam situasi seperti ini, berbicara tentang keselamatan rakyat adalah tidak masuk akal, dan masalah seperti kekuasaan penyelidikan tambahan dapat ditangani kemudian setelah sistem diterapkan.
Selain itu, reformasi kejaksaan bukanlah isu yang tiba-tiba. Meskipun seorang tokoh yang telah melalui posisi pemimpin partai dan berada di pusat operasi pemerintahan telah menyatakan keinginan untuk reformasi, menempatkan individu-individu yang tidak sesuai seperti Oh Kwang-soo, Bong Wook, dan Chung Sung-ho pada posisi-posisi kunci, dan sekarang berbicara tentang pembaruan personel adalah seperti memberikan obat setelah penyakit terjadi. Ada pertanyaan apakah ini adalah keinginan reformasi yang tulus.
Sulit dipahami bahwa mereka mengunggah berita tentang memenangkan penghargaan Golden Globe ke media sosial sambil mengklaim tidak tahu tentang keributan yang terkait dengan reformasi. Mengatakan kepada Anggota Dewan Perwakilan Chung Sung-ho 'Anda bekerja keras menerima pukulan sebagai pengganti' mengungkapkan niat untuk membiarkan tindakannya. Bahkan setelah melihat jawaban Anggota Dewan Perwakilan Chung Sung-ho di Komite Hukum dan Keadilan, membela dia melampaui batas pemahaman yang wajar. Apakah benar-benar normal dalam seni pengangkatan bahwa Lee Hae-hoon dipromosikan sementara individu seperti Choi Kang-wook, Cho Kuk, Park Eun-jung, dan Chu Mi-ae dikecualikan?
Jika ada pernyataan yang progresif dari kepemimpinan di masa depan, para pendukung mungkin lega dengan mengatakan 'Lihat, kami membuat masalah tanpa alasan.' Namun dunia tidak berubah melalui keheningan. Jangan lupa siaran yang berkata 'diam saja' pada saat bencana Sewol. Jangan bergantung pada satu pahlawan, tetapi berdebat dengan giat menurut pemikiran masing-masing.
Prosecutorial reform is a minimal defense mechanism at the national level against the group that has monopolized indictment and investigation authority, manipulated cases, and turned innocent people into criminals, thereby undermining national capacity. If maximum countermeasures had been taken, those responsible for such wrongdoing would have been eliminated. The argument that the prosecution is essential for national safety is a prosecutorial supremacist perspective, and criticizing the prosecution as criminal is an act of obscuring the point of the argument. We are now seeking to modify the system because we have witnessed cases of abuse of institutional loopholes.
Expectations that the prosecution will reform itself already expired during President Roh Moo-hyun's 'Dialog with Prosecutors' era. Except for rare exceptions like Assemblymember Park Eun-jeong, it is rational to abandon hopes for them, given that prosecutors-turned-politicians show favoritism toward their own people. Therefore, we must thoroughly exclude prosecution-related personnel and pursue separation of indictment and investigation authority. When there were such attempts in the past National Assembly in accordance with the people's will, the prosecution ultimately gave birth to the 'Yoon Suk-yeol prosecution republic,' and moreover, there is even a strong likelihood that it would have approved martial law for rebellion. In such circumstances, talking about national safety is absurd, and issues such as supplementary investigation authority are matters that can be addressed later after the system is implemented.
Furthermore, prosecutorial reform is not a sudden issue. Despite a figure at the center of state affairs having previously served as party leader and declared reform will, placing inappropriate individuals like Oh Gwang-su, Bong Wook, and Jung Seong-ho in key positions and now discussing personnel renewal is like taking medicine after the disease has progressed. I question whether this represents genuine reform will.
It is difficult to accept that news of a Golden Globe award is posted on SNS while claiming ignorance of noise related to reform. Saying to Assemblymember Jung Seong-ho, 'You work hard taking hits instead,' revealed an intention to tolerate his conduct. It goes beyond the realm of understanding to defend him after seeing his responses in the Justice Committee. Is it normal personnel management to promote Lee Hae-hun while excluding figures such as Choi Gang-uk, Cho Guk, Park Eun-jeong, and Choo Mi-ae?
If the leadership later makes forward-looking statements, supporters may console themselves saying, 'See, we made a fuss over nothing.' However, the world does not change through silence. Do not forget the broadcasts that said 'sit still' during the Sewol disaster. Do not depend on a single hero; we must engage in fierce debate with our own thoughts.
