[Edaily NOH HEE JUN Reporter Baek Ju-ah] Kim Ji-yong, the nominee for the first Commissioner of the Major Crimes Investigation Agency (MCIA), has found himself at the center of a political controversy. While there are questions regarding his suitability due to his past tenure in the prosecution service, the position holds significant symbolic weight as the first head of the MCIA—an agency created through prosecutorial reform—and his nomination has become a litmus test for gauging the Lee Jae-myung administration’s commitment to and direction of prosecutorial reform. Above all, analysts suggest that with President Lee Jae-myung’s approval ratings having plummeted by half, the issue of an early power struggle is surfacing in connection with Nominee Kim’s appointment. Ultimately, the outcome of Nominee Kim’s confirmation is expected to serve as a barometer for the power struggle between President Lee Jae-myung, who advocates pragmatism, and hardliners who emphasize ideological clarity.

According to political and legal circles on the 12th, the main points of contention raised by hardliners within the ruling party regarding Nominee Kim are his past stance on prosecutorial reform and his track record in handling major cases. Nominee Kim participated in a statement by senior prosecutors in 2020 criticizing the request to suspend and discipline then-Prosecutor General Yoon Suk-yeol, and in 2022, he argued for the need for supplementary investigations by the prosecution. Furthermore, he has faced criticism for acting as a “pro-Yoon political prosecutor” due to his involvement in discussions regarding the indictment in the case of former Deputy Minister of Justice Kim Hak-ui—who was illegally barred from leaving the country, a case involving Blue House officials from the Moon Jae-in administration—as well as the case of former Senior Prosecutor Jeong Jin-woong, who was accused of abuse of authority during a search and seizure operation targeting then-Chief Prosecutor Han Dong-hoon.

Nominee Kim (and his camp) maintain that one cannot label him as a “pro-Yoon prosecutor” or deem him unfit for prosecutorial reform based solely on this track record. They explain that his opposition to the disciplinary action against then-Prosecutor General Yoon Suk-yeol was based on pointing out procedural issues, and that regarding major cases (the Kim Hak-ui travel ban and the Jeong Jin-woong abuse of authority case), there were instances where he did not oppose indictment or was not directly involved. His past advocacy for supplementary investigations was also intended to “address concerns about gaps in victim protection,” and he now states that he “agrees with the fundamental principle of criminal justice reform—the separation of investigation and prosecution.” However, critics point out that it is difficult to fully verify the internal decision-making processes and the appropriateness of oversight judgments in past cases based solely on publicly available materials, and that the specific circumstances and his reform plans must be scrutinized during the confirmation hearing.

The reason the controversy surrounding Nominee Kim has become the core of the rift within the ruling bloc is interpreted as stemming, on the surface, from the fact that the issue goes beyond a debate over Nominee Kim’s personal qualifications based on his past history; it raises the question of whether the Lee Jae-myung administration has selected the right person to embody the spirit of prosecutorial reform as the head of the Central Investigation Agency. The Serious Crimes Investigation Agency, which took over the prosecution’s direct investigative functions following the abolition of the Prosecutors’ Office and is responsible for investigating serious crimes, is one of the two core pillars of the new judicial system, alongside the Public Prosecution Service, which handles indictments and trials. Gyeonggi Province Governor Choo Mi-ae, who has been making strong statements regarding prosecutorial reform, has described the head of the Serious Crimes Investigation Agency as “the captain of a ship setting sail with a mission of reform.” Another hardliner, Democratic Party Representative Kim Yong-min, also cited his opposition to Nominee Kim, stating that he is “a figure who has opposed prosecutorial reform,” and has viewed the position of Director of the Serious Crimes Investigation Agency as a leadership role that should spearhead prosecutorial reform.

Fundamentally, analysts suggest that the sharp drop in President Lee’s approval rating—which has plummeted from 60% to the 30% range—and the future power bloc’s efforts to differentiate themselves are intertwined with the controversy surrounding Nominee Kim. Shin Yul, a professor in the Department of Political Science and International Relations at Myongji University, stated, “While there are disputes over the nominee’s qualifications, this is nothing more or less than a power struggle within the broader ruling bloc aimed at ‘undermining President Lee Jae-myung,’” adding, “If the president’s approval rating had been high, the hardliners would not have been able to make such a fuss.” Hong Seong-geol, professor emeritus of public administration at Kookmin University, similarly analyzed, “From the perspective of those within the broader ruling bloc who dream of becoming the next leader, the president’s approval ratings have been falling quite steeply, making it absolutely necessary to differentiate themselves from him.” He added, “The issue surrounding nominee Kim Ji-yong is a good opportunity to highlight a clear reform agenda, so they have no choice but to latch onto it.” Ultimately, it is predicted that how the nominee Kim’s case is handled will serve as a barometer not only for the ideological struggle within the broader ruling bloc but also for the balance of power between current and future leadership.

The Democratic Party leadership has taken the position of refraining from public back-and-forth over the withdrawal of the nomination and instead focusing on vetting through the confirmation hearing. A Democratic Party leadership official, speaking with reporters, made no secret of his discomfort, stating, “Dissenting voices within the party regarding the President’s appointment authority are unlikely to have a positive impact on approval ratings.” Within the party, there are also concerns that the ruling party—which is emphasizing parliamentary oversight focused on people’s livelihoods—could be held back by internal conflicts surrounding the nominee’s selection. It has been pointed out that if the controversy drags on, it will not only make it difficult to focus on people’s livelihood issues—such as “making ends meet”—but could also disrupt the organizational operations of the newly launched Central Investigation Agency.