National Assembly Passes Bill Abolishing Prosecutors' Supplementary Investigation Authority: What Changes Starting October 2?
On 2026-07-31, the National Assembly passed an amendment to the Criminal Procedure Act prohibiting prosecutors from conducting direct and supplementary investigations. However, as of August 1, the amendment has not yet taken effect. Following its transfer to the government and promulgation, it is scheduled to take effect on 2026-10-02 if the process proceeds as planned.
Once the amendment takes effect, prosecutors will review case records rather than directly reinvestigate cases referred by the police. When additional investigation is necessary, they will request supplementary investigations from the police or other investigative agencies before deciding whether to prosecute.
Prosecutors Are Not Prohibited from Investigating as of Today
As of 2026-08-01, the current Criminal Procedure Act remains in force. A bill's passage at a National Assembly plenary session must be distinguished from the actual implementation of the amended law.
Bills passed by the National Assembly are forwarded to the government. The president may promulgate a bill or request that the National Assembly reconsider it. Therefore, the final law number and promulgated provisions must be checked again.
The currently known schedule is as follows.
| Category | Date | Status |
|---|---|---|
| National Assembly passage of the Criminal Procedure Act amendment | 2026-07-31 | Passed at a plenary session |
| Current status | 2026-08-01 | Government transfer and promulgation procedures require confirmation |
| Scheduled effective date | 2026-10-02 | Linked to the launch schedules of the Public Prosecution Office and the Serious Crimes Investigation Agency |
Therefore, investigations and case handling before October 2 should, in principle, be assessed under the existing law.
Does Abolishing Supplementary Investigation Authority Also Eliminate the Authority to Request Supplementary Investigations?
The authority to conduct supplementary investigations and the authority to request them are different.
Supplementary investigation authority refers to a prosecutor's power to directly supplement an investigation in a case referred by the police, including questioning suspects or witnesses and obtaining additional evidence.
The authority to request supplementary investigations allows prosecutors to review case records and require the police or other investigative agencies to address specific investigative deficiencies.
The amendment prohibits prosecutors from directly conducting supplementary investigations but preserves their authority to request additional investigations by the police. It also establishes more specific deadlines for police compliance and measures to address noncompliance.
| Category | Current System | After the Amendment Takes Effect |
|---|---|---|
| Direct investigations by prosecutors | Permitted within legally authorized limits | Prohibited in principle |
| Direct supplementary investigations of referred cases | Permitted within certain limits | Prohibited |
| Requests for supplementary investigations by police | Permitted | Retained |
| Police deadline for supplementary investigations | Generally 3 months | Generally 1 months |
| Extension of processing deadline | Handled under existing provisions | Extension of up to 1 months permitted |
| Measures for noncompliance | Requests for removal from duties or disciplinary action, among others | Requests for investigator replacement or disciplinary action, with the option to designate another agency |
| Prosecutors' direct warrant procedures | Available in cases investigated by prosecutors and other qualifying cases | Prosecutors apply to the court upon requests from police or other investigative agencies |
Prosecutors will continue to oversee cases in which they have requested supplementary investigations. In principle, the police must complete additional investigations within 1 months and send prosecutors comprehensive investigation results and records.
When necessary, the supplementary investigation period may be extended once, for up to 1 months.
What Will Prosecutors Do Going Forward?
The amendment does not abolish prosecutors' authority to bring criminal charges. Its basic approach is to separate responsibilities so that investigative agencies, including the police and the Serious Crimes Investigation Agency, conduct investigations while prosecutors handle indictments and the conduct of prosecutions in court.
The principal responsibilities retained by prosecutors include:
Reviewing case records referred by investigative agencies
Deciding whether to prosecute or decline prosecution
Requesting supplementary investigations from investigative agencies
Deciding whether to submit warrant applications from investigative agencies to the courts
Conducting prosecutions in court
Requesting reinvestigations of unjustified police decisions not to refer cases for prosecution
Conducting limited fact-checking by reviewing statements and materials provided by people involved in a case
Prosecutors may hear statements from suspects or other parties involved in a case and receive submitted materials. However, the amendment is designed to prevent statements or materials obtained through this procedure from being used as evidence at trial.
If information verified by a prosecutor is needed as actual evidence, the prosecutor will likely have to request another supplementary investigation from the police or another investigative agency. This has raised concerns that people involved in cases may have to repeat the same explanations to prosecutors and investigators.
Where Should Criminal Complaints and Accusations Be Filed?
After the amendment takes effect, prosecutors at the Public Prosecution Office will no longer directly perform the role of investigative agencies. As a general rule, criminal complaints and accusations will therefore be filed with the police or the investigative agency responsible for the relevant offense.
Even if a criminal complaint or accusation is submitted to a prosecutor, the Public Prosecution Office will have difficulty investigating the case directly. Depending on the type of offense, individuals should first identify the responsible agency, such as the police, the Serious Crimes Investigation Agency, the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials, or an agency with special judicial police authority.
In particular, around 2026-10-02, both agency names and case-filing channels may change. Before filing, it is advisable to check official guidance from the National Police Agency, Ministry of Justice, Public Prosecution Office, or Serious Crimes Investigation Agency.
If Police Decide Not to Refer a Case, You Must Respond Within 3 Months
If the police decide not to refer a case for prosecution because they find insufficient grounds for criminal charges, the first step is to confirm the date on which the non-referral decision was received.
The amendment includes a provision limiting the period for objecting to a non-referral decision to 3 months. Under the current system, there is no separate deadline for filing such objections. Once the amended law takes effect, managing the deadline following notification will become more important.
After receiving a non-referral decision, the following steps can be taken.
1. Record the date of notification of the non-referral decision and the case number.
2. Review the non-referral decision and the instructions for filing an objection.
3. Request access to and copies of the necessary case records.
4. Organize any unexamined evidence, statements, and relevant facts.
5. Specify errors in the application of the law or investigative omissions in the written objection.
6. Submit the objection to the police station that issued the non-referral decision within the statutory deadline.
Once an objection is filed, the police must forward the case records and reasons for the non-referral decision to a prosecutor. After reviewing the records, the prosecutor may request a reinvestigation if the decision is considered unjustified.
Complainants and victims are recognized as having the right to object, but individuals who report alleged crimes without being victims will not necessarily be able to object freely in every case. The right is expected to be recognized on a limited basis for offenses specified by presidential decree where the reporting individual is in a position comparable to that of a crime victim. The offenses covered by the implementing decree must therefore be checked.
Will Prosecutors Be Unable to Request Warrants Independently?
After the amendment takes effect, prosecutors will generally be unable to apply directly to courts for arrest, detention, or search-and-seizure warrants without an application from a judicial police officer or another authorized investigator.
If a prosecutor reviewing a referred case determines that a search and seizure or additional detention-related investigation is necessary, the prosecutor must request supplementary investigation from the police or other agency that investigated the case, including an application for the relevant warrant.
If the police fail to comply with a legitimate supplementary investigation request, the head of the Public Prosecution Office may request the responsible investigator's removal from duties, replacement, or disciplinary action. Where necessary, procedures will also allow a higher-level investigative agency or another investigative agency to be designated to conduct the supplementary investigation.
Some have argued that restricting prosecutors' direct warrant applications could conflict with the constitutional provisions governing warrant applications by prosecutors. This is not a definitive judicial conclusion but an issue that may be addressed through future constitutional litigation or judicial interpretation.
Some Crimes Will Not End with a Police Non-Referral Decision
As a measure to protect victims following the abolition of prosecutors' supplementary investigation authority, a system requiring all cases involving certain offenses to be forwarded for prosecutorial review is being pursued.
Under this system, the police would send case records to the Public Prosecution Office for another review even if they determine that no criminal offense has been established.
The offenses under discussion involve crimes against socially vulnerable groups, including:
Child abuse
Domestic violence
Sexual violence
Sexual offenses against children and adolescents
Stalking
Abuse of people with disabilities
Elder abuse
However, the comprehensive referral system cannot be fully established through the Criminal Procedure Act amendment alone. It is also necessary to check whether the individual laws governing these offenses have been amended and to review their final implementing provisions.
Whether crimes affecting ordinary citizens, such as voice phishing, rental deposit fraud, and embezzlement, will be subject to the same comprehensive referral system must be verified through separate legislation and implementing decrees.
What Happens to Cases Already Under Investigation?
Cases proceeding before 2026-10-02 will initially remain subject to the current system. However, for investigations continuing beyond the effective date, the agency to which a case is transferred may differ depending on the type of case and its procedural stage.
The following matters must be checked against the supplementary provisions of the promulgated law and the case-transfer guidelines issued by the relevant authorities.
The agencies that will receive cases currently under direct investigation by prosecutors
How cases undergoing supplementary police investigation will be handled
Cases referred to prosecutors but not yet resolved
Cases involving ongoing compulsory investigative measures, such as search and seizure or detention
Cases approaching the expiration of the statute of limitations
Related cases filed simultaneously with prosecutors and police
Jurisdictional rules between the Public Prosecution Office and the Serious Crimes Investigation Agency
If an investigation or criminal complaint is currently pending, it is advisable to record the case number, responsible agency, assigned official, filing date, and date of the most recent disposition.
Even if the responsible agency changes around the effective date, being able to verify the existing case number and history of document submissions can reduce the risk of cases being overlooked or documents being submitted twice.
Other Changes Included in the Criminal Procedure Act Amendment
In addition to abolishing prosecutors' investigative authority, the amendment includes provisions affecting case handling and victims' rights.
It requires materials produced during investigations to be recorded in the criminal justice information system, improving the traceability of investigative procedures.
The amendment also expands the right to inspect and copy case records needed to challenge police non-referral decisions.
Additional grounds on which courts may dismiss prosecutions include cases where charges were brought on the basis of seriously unlawful investigations and cases involving a substantial abuse of prosecutorial discretion.
However, the specific standards for determining what constitutes a 'seriously unlawful investigation' or a 'substantial abuse of discretion' may become clearer only as courts develop relevant precedents.
Key Issues Surrounding the Reform
Supporters argue that separating investigation and prosecution will reduce the concentration of authority within a single institution and allow investigative and prosecutorial agencies to check each other's powers.
They also view mandatory electronic recording of investigative materials, expanded victim access to case records, and improvements to procedures for objecting to non-referral decisions as positive changes.
Opponents and critics warn that the police workload could increase and that cases may repeatedly move between prosecutors and police, extending processing times.
There are also concerns that if materials obtained through prosecutors' fact-checking procedures cannot be used as evidence, victims or witnesses may have to repeat the same statements to police and prosecutors.
Some argue that preventing prosecutors from directly addressing investigative omissions could weaken the handling of complex financial crimes, cases involving digital evidence, and sexual offenses, where the timing of evidence collection can be critical.
At this stage, it is difficult to determine which predictions will materialize. A meaningful assessment will require examining case-processing times, the number of supplementary investigation requests, outcomes of objections to non-referral decisions, and trial statistics after implementation.
What People Involved in Criminal Cases Should Check Now
If a case is ongoing around the amendment's effective date, it is advisable to verify the following information.
The agency currently responsible for the case
Whether the case is still under police investigation or has been referred to prosecutors for review
The date of any notification of a non-referral or non-prosecution decision
The deadlines for filing objections or appeals
Whether the responsible agency is expected to change
The storage status of original evidence and copies already submitted
Whether the statute of limitations or criminal complaint filing deadline is approaching
When and where additional evidence should be submitted
For cases involving sexual offenses, stalking, or child abuse, where personal protection and evidence preservation are particularly important, individuals should not simply wait for the institutional changes. They should first request protective measures and evidence-preservation procedures from the investigative agency currently handling the case.
Frequently Asked Questions
Will Prosecutors Be Prohibited from Investigating the Day After the Bill Passes the National Assembly?
No. As of 2026-08-01, the amendment has passed the National Assembly's plenary session. Transfer to the government and promulgation are still pending, and the announced effective date is 2026-10-02.
If Supplementary Investigation Authority Is Abolished, Will Prosecutors Be Unable to Request Anything?
No. Prosecutors will lose the authority to conduct supplementary investigations directly, but they will retain the authority to request that the police or other investigative agencies conduct additional investigations to address deficiencies.
Can a Police Non-Referral Decision Be Challenged at Any Time?
After the amendment takes effect, an objection deadline of 3 months is expected to apply. It is essential to verify the date on which the non-referral notification was received and the rules for calculating the deadline under the final promulgated law.
Can Anyone Who Reports a Crime Object to a Non-Referral Decision in Every Case?
No. The right will not be extended universally to everyone who reports an alleged crime. It is expected to be recognized only for certain offenses designated by presidential decree where the reporting individual is in a position comparable to that of a crime victim. The subsequent implementing decree must therefore be checked.
Three Things That Must Be Verified Again
First, confirm the promulgation date, law number, and final provisions of the Criminal Procedure Act amendment.
Second, review the implementing decree specifying the offenses for which reporting individuals may object to police non-referral decisions and the procedures for supplementary investigations.
Third, check official guidelines from the Ministry of Justice and National Police Agency governing the transfer of cases filed before 2026-10-02 and changes to the agencies responsible for those cases.