ED Ruling DPK pushes questionable bill

Presidential secretary for political affairs Hong Ihk-pyo announces that President Lee Jae Myung has asked the DPK to consider public input on the bill for a special counsel to look into fabricated indictments. Yonhap

The June 3 local elections are less than 30 days away. Taking place a year after President Lee Jae Myung won a snap election in the wake of former President Yoon Suk Yeol's December 2024 martial law declaration and subsequent impeachment, it will be the first real chance for voters to assess Lee's administration. Elections in Korea are usually loud and even celebratory, especially in picking grassroots leaders. However, that is not the case this time.

Internal party dynamics seem to be the driving force behind how the local elections are playing out, with the ruling majority Democratic Party of Korea (DPK) looking all but sure to win a considerable number of local offices. The main opposition People Power Party (PPP), stuck with low approval ratings hovering at15 percent, has had difficulty fielding new candidates and chose to rely on nominating incumbents, despite voter disapproval.

Amid this imbalance, the DPK has proposed a controversial new bill that would allow an independent counsel to withdraw indictments in ongoing trials, and also calls for investigations into "fabricated indictments made on fabricated evidence" by the Yoon administration.

The aim of the bill is to probe 12 cases where there are allegations of indictments that relied on fabricated evidence, as found in earlier parliamentary probes, the DPK said. These include eight cases related to Lee including the land development scandal in Gyeonggi Province during the president's tenure as mayor of Seongnam and the Ssangbangwool North Korea remittance case.

As a result, Lee was facing five criminal trials related to the cases before they were put on hold when he was elected president. They will resume in June 2030.

One of the more conspicuous aspects of the bill is a provision that would allow a special counsel to decide whether to maintain or drop indictments. In reality, the bill could enable a special counsel to take actions that properly belong to the prosecutors who made the indictments. It would allow the special counsel to drop cases without court adjudication, an implicit violation of prosecutorial and judicial authority.

Moreover, the proposed bill would permit Lee to appoint the special counsel, endowed with the authority to determine whether to maintain the indictments against him, which sets up an obvious conflict of interest.

It is a basic principle that everyone stands equal before the law. Defendants in legal cases usually resolve grievances through court proceedings, albeit being a laborious process. The president should also be ready to do likewise, if needed.

The controversy surrounding the bill has lit a fire under the opposition. Both the PPP and the Reform Party have blasted the bill for violating the principles behind prosecutorial and judicial authority, as have legal experts and civic groups. Within the ruling party, candidates running in the more conservative southeastern region, including the DPK's Daegu mayoral candidate Kim Boo-kyum, have requested prudence.

That the president has requested the DPK "to decide the specific timing and procedures (for the bill) through public input and careful deliberation" alleviates some concerns. However, a group of opposition candidates including incumbent Seoul Mayor Oh Se-hoon, who is running for reelection, has called for the president to make sure that a special counsel will not have the authority to decide whether to maintain indictments.

To be fair, public trust in the former Yoon administration's prosecution is low. In fact, the prosecution has often been under scrutiny for its high-handed investigations and indictments, leading to the current administration's efforts at revamping the prosecution.

But disregarding the existing separation of powers, the rule of law and the belief that everyone is equal before it could prompt uneasiness among the public. It would be a mistake to think that an election win could sweep away such public concerns. The opposition has a chance to prove their relevance in keeping the ruling party in check. Both parties exist to foster and represent the voters of this country.