President Yoon Seok-yeol is making remarks at the 46th Cabinet meeting held at the Presidential Office in Yongsan, Seoul on the morning of the 29th. Presidential photojournalist group
The audio file of the phone call between President Yoon Seok-yeol and Myung Tae-gyun regarding former People Power Party lawmaker Kim Young-sun‘s nomination for the June 2022 by-election was made public on the 31st, causing a stir. Debate is also heating up in the political and legal circles over whether President Yoon violated the Public Official Election Act.
The primary issue is whether the president-elect has a duty of political neutrality. The time of the phone call between President Yoon and Mr. Myeong was on May 9, 2022, and President Yoon was the elected president one day before his inauguration.
Article 9 of the Public Official Election Act stipulates that public officials and other persons who must maintain political neutrality must not exercise undue influence in elections. In accordance with the ‘Presidential Transition Act’, the elected president receives the same protocol and security as the incumbent president, and has the personnel right to nominate candidates for Prime Minister and State Council members. However, until inauguration, there is no salary other than activity expenses. This means that it is difficult to view him as an elected official.
In the ruling party and legal circles, more weight is given to the opinion that “since the president-elect is not an elected official, it is difficult to view it as a violation of the election law even if he did something related to nomination.” Attorney Noh Hee-beom, a former researcher at the Constitutional Court, analyzed, “Because President Yoon was the elected president before taking office at the time, he cannot be considered a public official, and it is difficult to hold him responsible for violating the obligation of political neutrality.”
On the other hand, there is also a view that the elected president may be included in the ‘other political neutrality’ stipulated in Article 9 of the Election Act. Han Sang-hee, a professor at Konkuk University Law School, interpreted, “Because the president-elect has authority and power comparable to that of the president, he should be viewed as being included in the list of subjects who must maintain political neutrality.”
A photo posted by Myung Tae-gyun on his Facebook on September 25th. Facebook Capture
Another issue is the timing of when President Yoon’s ‘nomination-related actions’ were carried out. There is an interpretation that there was no problem because the phone call occurred on May 9, before President Yoon took office. Ji Seong-woo, professor at Sungkyunkwan University Law School and president of the Korean Constitutional Law Society, said, “It is in line with the principle of criminal justice (crimes and punishments are determined according to the law) to not be held legally responsible for acts committed before midnight on May 10, when the president’s term began.” He said, “Legal responsibility should be assessed not based on the date former Rep. Kim was nominated (the 10th), but based on the date the President gave instructions regarding nomination (before the 9th).”
On the other hand, the opposition party claims that “the intervention in the nomination was realized after President Yoon took office,” citing the fact that former lawmaker Kim’s nomination was confirmed on May 10. Even if the order was given when the president was elected, the intervention in the nomination was carried out during the president’s term, so it may be illegal. Democratic Party lawmaker Seo Young-kyo said on this day, “The ruling party’s nomination announcement, which was influenced by President Yoon’s actions (instructing nominations), occurred during the president’s term.”
The timing of implementation is important because it can be linked to the impeachment situation, which is fueled by the opposition party. Right now, Cho Kuk, the leader of the Cho Kuk Innovation Party, insisted, “All political parties should get on the impeachment train.” The Democratic Party leadership, which has kept its distance from impeachment, said on this day that “the people will decide” (Parliamentary leader Park Chan-dae), but voices calling for impeachment to proceed are growing within the party.
In response to this, Rep. Kwon Seong-dong, a prominent member of the pro-Yoon faction, refuted, saying, “This is not grounds for impeachment because it was a conversation that took place while he was the elected president.” Cha Jin-ah, a professor at Korea University Law School, explained, “To be grounds for impeachment, the president must have violated the Constitution or laws while performing his duties after taking office, but this case does not apply because it occurred before he took office.”
Park Chan-dae, floor leader of the Democratic Party of Korea, held an emergency press conference at the National Assembly on the morning of the 31st and released the transcript of the phone call between then-President Yoon and Myung Tae-gyun on May 9, 2022. Reporter Kang Jeong-hyeon
There are conflicting opinions as to whether this matter can be the subject of an investigation. The Constitution provides for the president’s privilege not to prosecute, but there are no provisions limiting the investigation. In November 2016, when the government corruption scandal broke out, former President Park Geun-hye, who was now the current president, announced her intention to respond to a face-to-face investigation by special prosecutor Park Young-soo’s team, but this was canceled due to differences of opinion on recording. At the time, the head of the special prosecutor’s investigation team was President Yoon.
Professor Sanghee Han said, “It is difficult to force an investigation, but arbitrary investigation is possible depending on the severity of the case.” On the other hand, a leading member of the ruling party refuted, “It is absurd to even talk about an investigation when a crime itself has not been committed.”
Kookhee SonㆍChanghoon Lee 9key@joongang.co.kr
