South Korean investigators escalated a politically charged probe into the 2024 attack on President Lee Jae Myung. Authorities executed a rare raid on the National Assembly Thursday seeking classified intelligence documents. This operation stems from the recent terrorism designation applied to the case.
Three investigators arrived at the Assembly and remained for approximately ninety minutes. They sought what sources describe as classified minutes from the intelligence committee. The document reportedly contains spy agency findings linking the attacker to an ultra-right-wing YouTuber. However, the team departed without seizing any materials.
The attack occurred on January second, 2024, during Lee’s visit to Busan. At that time, Lee served as leader of the Democratic Party. A sixty-seven-year-old man approached posing as a supporter. He then stabbed Lee in the neck, requiring hospitalization and surgery.
Authorities arrested the attacker immediately and later sentenced him to fifteen years imprisonment. The Busan Metropolitan Police concluded the man acted alone without accomplices or masterminds. Consequently, the initial investigation did not classify the incident as terrorism.
This original investigation proceeded under the previous Yoon Suk Yeol administration. The current ruling bloc now claims authorities attempted to downplay the case. Critics allege the National Intelligence Service and counterterrorism center removed on-site evidence. They further claim officials deliberately avoided terrorism designation.
Last month, the National Counterterrorism Committee formally revisited the case. The committee designated the stabbing as a terrorism incident. Subsequently, the government launched a dedicated task force to reopen the investigation. This terrorism designation fundamentally changes the legal framework applied to the case.
Thursday’s raid represents the most dramatic escalation in this renewed probe. Investigators targeting parliamentary records is highly unusual in South Korean practice. Legislative privilege and separation of powers principles typically protect such materials. Therefore, this action carries significant constitutional implications.
The intelligence committee minutes reportedly contain sensitive findings. These allegedly document NIS conclusions about the attacker’s ideological influences. Specifically, investigators suspect coordination with ultra-right-wing media figures. The YouTuber in question has not been publicly identified or charged.
Political reaction to the raid split sharply along partisan lines. Ruling Democratic Party lawmakers defended the investigation’s legitimacy. They argue full disclosure serves public interest and victim justice. Opposition People Power Party members condemned the raid as prosecutorial overreach. They characterize it as political persecution targeting previous administration officials.
Legal experts note the investigation faces substantial procedural hurdles. Classified intelligence documents enjoy broad statutory protection. Legislative proceedings carry constitutional privilege against executive intrusion. Consequently, prosecutors must navigate complex legal terrain to access these materials.
The terrorism designation itself remains contested. Critics argue retroactively classifying a crime violates legal principles. Supporters counter that new evidence justifies revised classification. The dispute will likely require judicial resolution.
This investigation intersects with multiple ongoing political conflicts. President Lee simultaneously faces opposition calls for special counsel probes. The Busan attack investigation now mirrors accusations directed at Lee’s own legal troubles. Consequently, each party weaponizes investigative processes against the other.
The reopened probe also raises questions about the original Busan police investigation. Detectives concluded solitary perpetrator motive without external influence. However, current authorities question whether evidence was fully examined. The alleged removal of on-site materials compounds these concerns.
Looking ahead, prosecutors will likely continue pursuing the intelligence committee documents. They may seek court orders compelling document production. Alternatively, they could request voluntary committee cooperation. Further parliamentary raids appear unlikely given Thursday’s unsuccessful outcome.
In conclusion, a knife attack nearly twenty-six months ago now threatens constitutional confrontation. The terrorism designation transformed a closed criminal case into an active political battleground. Thursday’s parliamentary raid escalated this conflict to unprecedented levels. Both branches of government now collide over classified information and investigative authority.
