Such is the never-ending drama of corporate malfeasance that when police this week sought an arrest warrant for Bang Si-hyuk, founder and chairman of HYBE, the company behind BTS, my first thought was: Here we go again.
But this case is about more than a familiar cycle of scandal and outrage. It is a test of something far larger: whether Korea’s recent judicial reforms, championed by the current government, represent a genuine shift in principle or merely a reshuffling of power.
At first glance, the case appears straightforward. Investigators allege that Bang misled investors ahead of HYBE’s initial public offering, potentially violating the Capital Markets Act.
Until recently, such a case would have been led by prosecutors. Now it is in the hands of the police. This change reflects a series of reforms over the past six to seven years aimed at curbing the once-dominant power of the prosecution by separating investigative and prosecutorial functions.
The intent was to create a more balanced system. The question now is whether it works.
Before answering that, it is worth reflecting on our own role as citizens observing the justice system.
You and I are not officers of the law. We are, well, the mob. We watch events unfold on our screens, react emotionally, decide who is guilty and — particularly when the accused is wealthy or politically connected — demand punishment. Sometimes, we yell for crucifixion.
A functioning democracy depends on the justice system being better than us. Justice must be delivered not only fairly, but with safeguards that protect the accused from public sentiment.
For that to happen, those who operate the system must adhere to basic principles. One is the presumption of innocence.
That principle helps us better understand what an arrest warrant is, and is not. It is not a verdict, nor even an indication of guilt. It is a procedural tool, to be used sparingly and only under specific conditions.
Source: Korea Times News
