Expertise vs. democracy: Dispute heats up over ad hoc committee on Shin Kori

Members of the Young Women's Christian Association fly paper airplanes, chanting their support of the halt on construction of reactors 5 and 6 at the Shin Kori Nuclear Power Plant in Ulsan on June 7. / Korea Times photo by Jeon Hye-won

Chang Moon-hee, senior research advisor at the Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute

Yun Sun-jin, professor at Seoul National University's Graduate School of Environmental Studies

Whang Joo-ho, professor at Kyung Hee University's Department of Nuclear Engineering

Kim Yearn-min, professor at the University of Ulsan's Department of Industrial Engineering

By Park Jae-hyuk

Since the temporary suspension of the construction of reactors 5 and 6 at the Shin Kori Nuclear Power Plant in Ulsan, a fierce controversy has arisen over an ad hoc committee that will determine the future of the two reactors.

The nine-person committee will soon select 200 to 300 jurors, who will have a three-month discussion to decide whether to suspend the construction permanently or to resume it.

Participants of a roundtable meeting organized by The Korea Times showed different opinions on the upcoming decision over the nation's energy policy ─ a laymen's jury will come up with the conclusion.

"Experts will participate in the procedure as well," said Prof. Yun Sun-jin at Seoul National University's Graduate School of Environmental Studies. "The jury will make their decision after listening to the experts. Citizens will be able to watch the discussion on television and to ask about the grounds of each of the expert's claims via social media."

Chang Moon-hee, a senior research advisor at the Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute, was skeptical of Yun's prospects.

"I doubt that citizens could make a scientific decision in three months. It is too short a time for them to judge, unless the jury consists of technical experts," he said. "Considering that the debate on spent nuclear fuel has yet to end either, I'd rather suggest the ad hoc committee gauge public opinion for more than a year."

Prof. Kim Yearn-min at the University of Ulsan's Department of Industrial Engineering refuted Chang's arguments, citing a 17-person Ethics Commission in Germany that decided to phase out nuclear power after an eight-week discussion following the Fukushima incident.

"This is a matter of life, rather than a matter of technology. More than 3 million people are facing the risks of damage to their wealth and health," Kim said. "Technical experts have distorted the truth about nuclear power."

Within a radius of 30 kilometers of the Shin Kori complex, there are more than 3 million residents. They would be vulnerable to radiation if an accident occurred at the nearby nuclear plant.

Yun regarded the three months as a compromise to avoid further disputes over cost issues.

[Debate] Shin Kori reactors: to be or not to be

2017-07-23 17:24 | Society

"Citizens are those who pay taxes and those who will suffer in the case of accidents," she said. "Asking citizens about the matter is very democratic in itself."

Using the term, "unlevel playing field," Chang pointed out that the ad hoc committee may not be democratic at all, given the Moon Jae-in administration's negative stance on nuclear power.

Kim and Yun, however, denied Chang's claim, saying that every presidential candidate, except for Hong Joon-pyo of the Liberty Korea Party, vowed earlier this year to phase out nuclear power.

"In fact, the nuclear experts are those who have enjoyed benefits from the unlevel playing field," Yun said.

Hoping for a level playing field to reach an objective conclusion, Prof. Whang Joo-ho at Kyung Hee University's Department of Nuclear Engineering pointed out another problem surrounding the ad hoc committee ─ unlawfulness.

"The government has presented the Energy Act as a legal basis for the formation of the ad hoc committee, but the law includes additional procedures for it," he said. "An ad hoc committee and the jury's decision can provoke disputes on whether or not it's lawful."

Whang said the government could have obeyed the law from the beginning.

The government is reportedly considering amending the related-law to minimize Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power's possible losses, if the jury decides to suspend the construction permanently.

Holding a heated debate for hours, however, all the participants agreed that the government should listen to the people's opinion on nuclear power.

"It is good to ask citizens about the national agenda," Chang said. "I think a debate is necessary, no matter how reasonable or how emotional the debate would be."

Citing Niccolo Machiavelli, Whang said, "The public may misjudge an abstract matter, but they can correctly decide on a concrete proposal."

Yun said the formation of the ad hoc committee will be one of the most historic moments in Korea.

"You should believe in our citizens, who show the country's capability," Kim said.

Site Map E-paper Subscribe Register LogIn
Site Map E-paper Subscribe Register LogIn