ED Korea deserves transparent, trusted election watchdog
A grim-faced Roh Tae-ak, then chairman of the National Election Commission, is seen during a press conference on June 5 to announce his resignation to take responsibility for the mismanagement of the June 3 local elections. Yonhap
NEC probe must lead to meaningful reform
A police-prosecution task force will summon election officials this week as part of its investigation into the National Election Commission (NEC) over ballot paper shortages during the June 3 local elections.
Last week, investigators searched the NEC headquarters and six related facilities, seizing documents and computer servers. According to media reports, the probe will focus on identifying the root cause of the ballot shortages and determining who was responsible for the decision to print enough ballots for only 50 percent of the total number of eligible voters in some electorates.
The task force must conduct a fair and thorough investigation into the election commission. It should also expand its probe to examine other issues and suspicions that have emerged since the local elections. The ballot shortage is merely the tip of the iceberg in an NEC-created scandal that has shaken the nation.
Various irregularities have been reported. In the Incheon mayoral race, the vote totals for two candidates — one from the ruling Democratic Party of Korea (DPK) and the other from the main opposition People Power Party (PPP) — were identical across two ballot-counting districts. In Songdo 2-dong, the two candidates received exactly the same number of early votes as they did in Songdo 1-dong: 1,440 votes for incumbent Mayor Yoo Jeong-bok of the PPP and 3,030 votes for DPK candidate Park Chan-dae.
A similar pattern appeared in elections held in Gwangju and South Jeolla Province. In Geumsan County, DPK candidate Min Hyung-bae received 1,401 votes, while PPP candidate Lee Jung-hyun received 120. The exact same figures were recorded in another electoral district in Songjeong 1-dong. This vote-matching phenomenon occurred in 10 electoral districts across the region.
The probability of such identical results occurring naturally in real elections is extraordinarily low, if not virtually impossible. Notably, these patterns were found only in early-voting results, not in ballots cast on Election Day.
The NEC has dismissed concerns, claiming the similarities were purely coincidental and insisting there were no mistakes or errors in the vote-tabulation process.
Despite those denials, public suspicions have intensified as numerous other serious irregularities have come to light. At a polling station in Seoul's Wolgye 3-dong, for example, NEC documents show that 2,066 voters cast ballots and that 2,300 ballots had been prepared. The number of unused ballots should therefore have been 234. However, the actual figure recorded in the document was only 34.
This raises an obvious question: What happened to the remaining 200 ballots?
Similar discrepancies in ballot counts have reportedly been found in several other electoral districts, including Jamsil in Seoul.
This is unacceptable.
Whenever concerns have been raised about early voting, election results or vote tabulation, the NEC has consistently maintained that there were no problems with its administration of the electoral process. The commission has often dismissed such concerns by labeling those who raise them as "conspiracy theorists" or "election deniers."
The NEC has become a besieged institution largely because it chose to stigmatize citizens raising legitimate questions instead of clearly explaining what went wrong and how such outcomes occurred.
Following the June 3 elections, voters watched a series of news reports detailing the NEC's mismanagement of the electoral process. As a result, many have become convinced that the election commission requires fundamental reform. The NEC has lost public confidence.
The joint investigation team's seizure of NEC documents and servers took place within this context. The prosecution-police investigation should serve as the starting point for a comprehensive reform of Korea's election management system. The nation needs a new system that is transparent, accountable and trustworthy.
For years, the NEC has been treated as an institution beyond criticism, particularly by politicians. Elected officials and aspiring politicians alike have often refrained from challenging the commission, even when allegations against it appeared reasonable, for fear of potential political repercussions. For many politicians, the NEC has long been an institution capable of making or breaking careers.
In election-related litigation, the NEC has also enjoyed a significant institutional advantage. A Supreme Court justice serves as the NEC chairman, creating the perception that the nation's highest court is aligned with the election authority.
Unlike most legal disputes, which proceed through a three-tier judicial system, election lawsuits are decided in a single proceeding by the Supreme Court. The justices have the first and final say. This arrangement creates an inherent conflict of interest and undermines citizens' rights to seek impartial review in disputes concerning elections.
Despite the numerous anomalies reported in this and past elections, the NEC has thus far avoided meaningful accountability, largely because of the institutional protection afforded by its relationship with the Supreme Court.
Ending the nexus between Supreme Court justices and the NEC should be one of the central goals of any meaningful reform.