The long-standing feud between the prosecution and the police has burst to the forefront again ahead of the December presidential election.

The two law enforcement agencies have been at odds for years over their respective powers.

The government responded by implementing a new ordinance in January that allows the prosecutors to take over cases when they deem a police investigation problematic.

In the lead up to the presidential election, police have protested the rule, which they claim to be an infringement of its authority, making it a major campaign issue.

The controversy received the spotlight after police announced last week they are investigating a prosecutor accused of corruption and the prosecution immediately launched its own investigation.

The stakes are increasing with top-level officials engaging in an emotional war of words and presidential candidates stepping in with differing solutions.

The fight was reignited with the case of a notorious con artist, Cho Hee-pal, who swindled an estimated 3.5 trillion won ($3.2 billion) to 4 trillion won from tens of thousands of investors.

Cho ran a pyramid scheme which rented medical equipment for five years from 2004.

The police announced in May that Cho had died in China, but the prosecutors cast doubt on the result of the police investigation and asked the Chinese authorities in July to check whether the conman had died.

While conducting its investigation, the police have learned that a prosecutor surnamed Kim was bribed by Cho around 200 million won which had been deposited in a third-party bank account. Kim allegedly received 600 million won from Eugene Group, a mid-sized conglomerate.

The Supreme Prosecutors’ Office established an ad hoc team for its own investigation two days after the police announced that it was investigating the bribed prosecutor’s case.

The team consisting of 10 prosecutors and 15 detectives raided Sunday the homes and offices of the prosecutor, Eugene Group and others involved.

The police blame the prosecutors for trying to intercept the case in fear of a police probe hurting their reputation.

“The police will continue the investigation into the case,” said Kim Ki-yong, the commissioner general of the National Police Agency, criticizing the prosecution’s interjection.

He said the double investigation could lead to an abuse of human rights.

The police have issued a summons to the prosecutor, who is suspected of receiving bribes, to appear at the National Police Agency on Friday. It plans to further investigate and summon other figures involved.

However, the prosecution says the police should get their hands off the case since it is the prosecutors that have more legal knowledge and superior authority.

“There is no necessity for a police investigation. I will finish this work,” said Kim Soo-chang, the special prosecutor who heads the ad hoc team.

Likening prosecutors and police to doctors and nurses, he said Sunday that prosecutors do better in investigation and making better legal decisions as law experts.

The ad hoc investigative team ordered the police to hand over the case in accordance of the presidential ordinance on the prosecution’s supervision of the police’s preliminary investigations

Under the rule passed in late 2011, prosecutors can order the police to refer the case when human rights infringements and other issues arise. Police are allowed to make an objection.

In January, the police in Daegu made an objection to a command by the prosecution for the first time after the new rule took effect in January.

A police officer in Miryang, South Gyeongsang Province, filed a suit against a prosecutor in March. He claimed that the prosecutor insulted him and tried to prevent a police investigation into a firm suspected of illegally disposing industrial waste.

The two agencies also collided in September over a case involving the owner of Korea’s biggest room salon located in southern Seoul. The prosecution investigated hundreds of police officers working in the nearby area. Four police officers were sentenced to jail terms and several others were fined.

It is believed to have been in retaliation for a police investigation into a tax official, who is a relative of a senior prosecution official, on charges of receiving bribes.

The three major presidential candidates have pledged to mitigate the power struggle between the two agencies by achieving reform in investigative rights.

The ruling Saenuri Party’s presidential candidate Park Geun-hye said she will reorganize the relation of the two agencies that enables them to check and monitor each other.

To that end, she said, investigation and indictment should be separated, but with all the circumstances taken into account she will try to achieve a rational allocation of investigation rights with consultations.

Basically, Park agrees to the idea that more investigation rights should be given to the police, according to her camp.

Candidate Moon Jae-in of the Democratic United Party agrees with giving the police more investigative authority. He favors giving the rights to the police in phases starting minor crimes.

“It is necessary for the police to gain independent investigation rights,” Moon said.

Independent presidential candidate Ahn Cheol-soo is considering minimizing direct investigation by the prosecutors.

“The collision (between the prosecutors and the police) shows a need to verify fundamental problems and to seek fundamental and structural methods for improvement,” Yoo Min-young, a spokesperson of Ahn, said Monday.

“Abolition of the Supreme Public Prosecutors’ Office and reducing prosecutors’ power in investigation are necessary.”

By Kim Young-won (wone0102@heraldcorp.com)