[Editorial] Fabricated Evidences of `North Winds` Should Be Investigated

The documents submitted by the prosecution to the court regarding the case of `North winds` in September could have created a stir in the political circle and could have affected the presidential election next year in case. The court ruled that such evidences could not be accepted and they were clearly fabricated.

When the court does not accept the evidences submitted by either prosecution or defendant, the court often indirectly says that it is `hard to believe` such evidences. The fact that the court used such a strong expression like `fabricated documents` indicates its effort to cut off any attempt to use the court as a means for political exposure.

A letter by an attorney, allegedly written by the president of the Grand National Party (GNP) Lee Hoi-Chang and was given to Rep. Chung Jae-Moon, states that `Rep. Chung will pay 3.6 million US dollar to North Korea`. The court said that considering the circumstance of the acquisition of the letter, the form, content, and handwriting of the letter of attorney made it impossible to recognize the document as authentic. It is not clear as to why such important evidences were not mentioned, but suddenly appeared on the second trial.

It also does not make sense how the presidential candidate of the ruling party in 1997 could leave clear evidences like them while operating such fatal maneuvering. Regarding the agreement which was allegedly written by Rep. Chung and the deputy chairperson of the North`s Committee for the Peaceful Reunification of the Fatherland in a hotel in Beijing, the court said that there was no choice but to view the document as having been forged.

Regarding the court ruling, the prosecution said that the court lacked `an objective view`. The Supreme Court will make the final ruling. However, if the documents were related to the president of the opposition party and could create a political stir, the prosecution should have thoroughly examined and verified them before submitting to the court. It was not something they could just `try` as evidence.

The court sentenced Rep. Chung to pay 10 million won of penalty, which was lighter sentence given in the first trial. The court found Chung only to be guilty of illegal contact with North Korean officials, since there was no evidence that he requested for `North winds` to create an advantageous circumstance for winning the presidential election.

It is the right way for the prosecution to ask for the court`s judgment based on what it has as evidences. It is suspicious of the intention of the prosecution that submitted such questionable documents as new evidences. The prosecution should investigate the suspicion of the fabrication of evidence, which was raised by the court, to prepare for the judgment of the Supreme Court.