NHRC Finds Reason to Suspect that Illegal Detention and Cruel Treatment Occurred during the Prosecutor’s Investigation
Regarding the July 2002 complaint filed by SK Construction Company former Vice President KIM Ki-yong (63) and former Namgu District Mayor (Incheon City) LEE Heon-bok (60) against the Prosecutor General, the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) has recognized that there is a substantial possibility that Prosecutor JEONG, of the Incheon District Public Prosecutor’s Office, had illegally detained the two complainants and subjected them to cruel treatment. The NHRC asked the Prosecutor General to undertake an investigation of the case.
The case originated on 16 September 1999 at
The defendant and all the other detectives involved in the questioning process flatly denied the complainant’s accusations. While the defendants acknowledged that KIM was escorted to the police station, they claimed that questioning was carried out with KIM’s consent, and that after a brief questioning, on the evening of
After looking into the duration of the investigation, whether there was consent, and whether there was cruel treatment, the NHRC found the following. There is reason to recognize the SK Vice-President’s detention (Sept 16 – 19) at the Incheon District Public Prosecutor’s Office as illegal in light of consistent and detailed testimony from others taken in for questioning, namely, his chauffeur, as well as others related to the bribery scandal including SK Construction Company’s Managing Director Bae and SK employee PARK, and because the police had not obtained an arrest warrant for KIM. Thus, the NHRC found that there is significant cause to believe that there was infringement of KIM’s rights to be free from unlawful confinement (Criminal Act, article 124) and from “violence and cruel acts” (Criminal Act, article 125). The NHRC has asked the Prosecutor General to undertake formal investigation of the case.
Although the NHRC has also investigated into co-complainant LEE Heon-bok’s case, the NHRC could not find anything suspicious in the records nor was there any supporting testimony from witnesses aside from the complainant himself. With no evidence supporting the complainant’s claims, the NHRC dismissed the case as false.