S. Korea’s Troubling Pattern of Selective Probes

Uneven justice? South Korea’s church-politics probes raise questions of a disturbing pattern of lack of prosecutorial balance

The latest developments surrounding South Korea’s investigations into alleged church-politics collusion have reignited a familiar and sensitive debate: whether the country’s law-enforcement institutions apply the same standards of urgency and rigor to all political actors, regardless of party affiliation.

See also Current Korean Situation: Context and Key Issues

See also Lobbying Case: 14 Months for Former Executive

See also Court: Prosecutors’ Overreach in Politicized Case

See also South Korea: Doctored Document Cited as Proof

See also Religion-State: The Danger of Policing Belief

See also Unificationism Emerging as a World Religion

At the center of this controversy is an apparent asymmetry. Allegations involving members of the ruling Democratic Party (DPK) appear to be languishing with little tangible progress, while probes touching the main opposition People Power Party (PPP) are advancing rapidly and aggressively. For many observers, this contrast raises uncomfortable questions about prosecutorial discretion, political influence, and institutional credibility.

The large daily newspaper Chosun Ilbo published on 26^th January a report headlined “Police Probe Into ‘Unification Church Case’ Stalls … Jeon Jae-soo Prepares to Run for Busan Mayor”. The article highlights the above-mentioned concern through the case of Democratic Party lawmaker Jeon Jae-soo (전재수).

Police have been investigating allegations that Jeon received tens of millions of won in cash and valuables from figures associated with the Family Federation – formerly the Unification Church – allegedly in exchange for political favors, between 2018 and 2020. Despite the seriousness of the accusations – and despite the fact that the statute of limitations for certain offenses is close to expiring – the investigation has shown little substantive movement nearly two months after it formally began. This inertia stands in stark contrast to the speed and intensity of parallel investigations involving the PPP.

The Jeon Jae-soo case resurfaced after a delayed disclosure that a special prosecutor team, originally tasked with examining alleged lobbying by the Family Federation toward the PPP, had uncovered testimony implicating not only opposition figures but also lawmakers affiliated with the Democratic Party.

According to testimony given in August of last year by Yoon Yeong-ho (윤영호), a former senior official of the Family Federation, large sums of money and valuables were allegedly delivered to Jeon, former Democratic Party lawmaker Lim Jong-seong (임종성), and former Future United Party lawmaker Kim Gyu-hwan (김규환). Yet despite this testimony, no investigative action was taken for more than four months.

The special prosecutor later argued that allegations involving Democratic Party figures fell outside the statutory scope of the special counsel’s mandate and were therefore transferred to the police. While this explanation may be procedurally defensible, critics note that the practical consequence was a significant delay – one that now risks rendering the case moot if statutes of limitation expire. Jeon resigned from his ministerial post and was questioned once as a suspect in December, but since then, investigators have reportedly confined themselves largely to digital forensic analysis, without further interrogations or summonses of other implicated figures.

This lack of urgency becomes particularly striking when viewed alongside Jeon’s political behavior. Far from retreating from public life, he has begun openly preparing a bid for mayor of Busan, South Korea’s second-largest city. He has publicly discussed his expected declaration date, flooded the city with campaign banners, and scheduled appearances at high-profile political events. Within Korean political culture, such actions are often interpreted as a signal that a politician believes legal risks are either manageable or already neutralized. For critics, this reinforces the perception that the investigation has lost momentum at a crucial moment.

By contrast, prosecutors’ handling of allegations involving the Shincheonji Church [See editor’s note below] and the People Power Party has been markedly different. In that case, prosecutors have moved swiftly to secure testimony suggesting that tens of thousands of Shincheonji members were mobilized to join the PPP en masse between 2021 and 2023. Former regional leaders of the church have reportedly provided detailed accounts, enrollment targets, and even lists of individual party members. Prosecutors are now preparing compulsory measures, including large-scale search-and-seizure operations, to expand the probe.

To a Western audience, this disparity may appear puzzling, but it is rooted in several features of South Korea’s political and institutional landscape. First, the country has a long history of politicized prosecution. For decades, prosecutors were widely seen as aligned with conservative governments; in recent years, progressive administrations have sought to rebalance that power, sometimes resulting in perceptions – fair or not – that prosecutorial zeal now disproportionately targets conservatives. Each shift in political power tends to be accompanied by accusations that law enforcement has become an instrument of partisan accountability rather than neutral justice.

Second, South Korea’s legal system grants prosecutors and police significant discretion in pacing investigations, prioritizing cases, and determining when to deploy coercive measures. While such discretion exists in most democracies, it becomes controversial in highly polarized environments where timing can shape electoral outcomes. An investigation that accelerates before an election can be politically devastating; one that stalls until statutes of limitation expire can be politically absolving.

Third, religious organizations like the Family Federation and Shincheonji [See editor’s note below] occupy a uniquely sensitive position in Korean society. They are often viewed with suspicion by the media, and allegations of political collusion tend to provoke strong public reactions. When investigations appear selective – aggressive in one direction, cautious in another – it reinforces suspicions that legal standards are being applied unevenly depending on which political faction stands to benefit.

From this perspective, the issue is not merely whether Jeon Jae-soo is guilty or whether the PPP benefited improperly from Shincheonji’s [See editor’s note below] actions. Rather, it is whether South Korea’s justice system can convincingly demonstrate that similar allegations trigger similar investigative responses, regardless of who holds power. For a democracy that prides itself on hard-won institutional reforms and public accountability, the appearance of differential treatment risks eroding trust not only in prosecutors and police, but in the political system as a whole.

In that sense, the Chosun Ilbo article is less about one stalled investigation than about a broader pattern that many Koreans – and increasingly foreign observers – find troubling: when justice moves quickly in one direction and hesitates in another, explanations grounded solely in procedure may no longer suffice.

See also Current Korean Situation: Context and Key Issues

See also Lobbying Case: 14 Months for Former Executive

See also Court: Prosecutors’ Overreach in Politicized Case

See also Religion-State: The Danger of Policing Belief

See also South Korea: Doctored Document Cited as Proof

See also Unificationism Emerging as a World Religion

See also Turning Journalism into Moral Storytelling

See also Korea: Distortions Refuted in Statement to Media

See also When Special Prosecutors Become Political Tools

See also Religion Between Engagement and Withdrawal

See also Climate of Suspicion: Peace Reframed as Politics

See also Korea: Can Religion and Politics Be Disentangled?

Text: Knut Holdhus, editor

Featured image above: Imbalanced justice in South Korea. Illustration: Chat GPT, 26th January 2026.

[Editor’s note: Shincheonji, officially known as Shincheonji Church of Jesus, the Temple of the Tabernacle of the Testimony, is a new religious movement founded in South Korea in 1984 by Lee Man-hee, who claims to be the promised pastor mentioned in the Bible’s Book of Revelation. Shincheonji teaches that the Book of Revelation is being fulfilled through its church and that Lee Man-hee has received divine revelation to interpret it.]

See also Some Religions Are Welcome in Politics, Some Not

See also Fact-Based Clarification of Media Misreporting

See also President’s Own Party Drawn into Lobbying Claims

See also Faith, Finance, Fairness: Rethinking the Narrative

See also Balcomb: “Prosecutors’ Case Is Politically Driven”

See also Likely Long Legal Battle Ahead for Mother Han

See also Bail Hearing with Mother Han’s Spiritual Message

See also Trial Day 1: Mother Han Denies All Allegations

See also Asia Today Editorial: “Avoid Detention of Clergy!”

See also Complaint Filed Against Lead Special Prosecutor

See also SKorea’s Polarization Shapes Views of Mother Han

See also Inside the Detention Center: A 10-Minute Visit

See also Health Concerns: 82-Year-Old Pretrial Detainee

See also In Tiny Solitary Cell: Irreversible Harm Caused

See also Mother Han Briefly Released for Medical Reasons

See also Message of Religious Unity from Detention Cell

See also Over 50 Days in Vigil Outside Detention Center

Related to troubling pattern: Mother Han’s December Trial: Long Detention Ahead

Also related to troubling pattern: A 10-Minute Visit to Mother Han in Detention

Also related to troubling pattern: Denying Allegations: Hak Ja Han (82) in Inquiry

Also related to troubling pattern: SKorean Court’s Sharp Criticism of Prosecutors

And also related to troubling pattern: Detention: Harsh Cell Conditions Spark Outcry

More, related to troubling pattern: Ugly: Arrest Warrant Sought for Hak Ja Han (82)

And more, related to troubling pattern: Critics Warn of “Authoritarian Drift” in SKorea

Even more, related to troubling pattern: Court Decision to Prolong Detention Condemned

Still more, related to troubling pattern: Co-Founder, 82, Questioned 9 Hours by Prosecutors

Also related to troubling pattern: Democratic Party’s Assault on Family Federation

And even more, related to troubling pattern: Mother Han (82) in Poor Health in Damp, Cold Cell

And still more, related to troubling pattern: Korean Crisis: “True Democracy Must Serve Heaven”

And yet more, related to troubling pattern: Faith Leaders Protest State Assault on Religion

Also related to troubling pattern: News Release Blasts Indictment of Hak Ja Han, 82

More, related to troubling pattern: 70 Years On: Detention History Repeats Itself

And more, related to troubling pattern: Trump Raises Alarm Over Church Raids in Korea

Even more, related to troubling pattern: Mike Pompeo Calls Probe of Co-Founder “Lawfare”

Still more, related to troubling pattern:  Korean Faith Crackdown: USA Urged to Confront It

Yet more, related to troubling pattern: Korean Bribery Scandal: Media Clears Federation

And also related to troubling pattern: Raids Blur Line Between Justice and Politics

More, related to troubling pattern: Heavy-Handed Raid on Sacred Sites Condemned