In a bizarre development over the weekend, the prosecution snatched a bribery case from police and started its own investigation all of a sudden. It did so because the case involved a senior prosecutor. No matter what it says, however, the prosecution made the wrong move.

Notwithstanding a long-lasting turf war between the two law-enforcement agencies, the prosecution’s move was seen as nothing but an ill-advised attempt to hoodwink the public and downplay the case. Few would expect the prosecution to remain fair and objective in its investigation.

On Sunday, a cobbled-together team of prosecutors raided the office and home of the prosecutor suspected of taking hundreds of millions of won from a swindler thought to be hiding in China. It also raided the business group Eugene, from which the prosecutor was also suspected of taking 600 million won ($551,000) in bribes.

The prosecution team took documents and other materials for evidence before the National Police Agency sought warrants for search and seizure. The prosecution team’s raids followed the NPA’s issuance on Saturday of a summons to the accused prosecutor to present himself for questioning on Friday.

The prosecution claimed it would have constituted dereliction of duty if it had sat idly by when a senior prosecutor was involved in a bribery case. But its action invited cynicism, not just from police, but also from the news media and others, who regard it as an attempt to treat the scandalous prosecutor with kid gloves, downplay the case and contain the damage done to its public image, as it had allegedly done in the past.

The NPA, which had often been at loggerheads with the prosecution over its demand for greater investigative authority in the past, vows to go ahead with its own investigation into the bribery case. It also promises to investigate other criminal cases involving some other prosecutors.

Police have their own share of bad apples, but the bribery scandal is a major setback for the prosecution, which major presidential candidates find necessary to rein in. They agree that the prosecution has often used its nearly exclusive authority to prosecute criminal suspects in favor of those close to the president and other powerful figures.

Given that the prosecution has lost the moral high ground so many times in the past, its reform cannot be delayed any longer. The presidential candidates are well advised to make the prosecution’s reform a priority in their election promises.