From People Power Party's operational issues to Democratic Party's TV programming intentions, a focused look at political current affairs

Criticism has been raised that the People Power Party's operational structure is centered on the vested interests of National Assembly members, not party members. In particular, the difference in the composition methods of emergency committee members and supreme council members was pointed out as a problem. Supreme council members must pay tens of millions of won in deposits and be chosen by party members through a national convention, whereas emergency committee members are appointed by the floor leader, leading to a distorted structure where emergency committee members are more numerous, it was pointed out.

The party leader can be forcibly dismissed, and the structure in which the floor leader, not the chief supreme council member, takes over and appoints the emergency committee chairman is criticized for diminishing the role of the party leader, who is given legitimacy by party members. This means that the principle of a party-member-centric party, as stipulated in the party constitution and rules, has been undermined, and the party's affairs have been distorted into a structure where a small number of lawmakers control them.

It has been pointed out that the People Power Party's 'two suns' system, where the party leader and floor leader exercise equal authority, causes unnecessary conflict and negatively impacts party management. In particular, it was emphasized that party affairs should naturally revolve around the party leader, who is directly elected by party members and given legitimacy.

The current structure is criticized for weakening the party leader's leadership and potentially exacerbating internal party confusion. This system can prevent the will of party members from being properly reflected and make it difficult to set a consistent direction for the party, according to analysis.

A critical stance was presented regarding Assemblywoman Choi Min-hee's media reform claims, stating that their basis is absurd. Assemblywoman Choi analyzed that approval ratings declined due to the media, but this is different from reality.

On the contrary, it was pointed out that there is collusion between traditional media and power, and the framework that makes it seem like only the opposition party is being harassed and disciplined is untrue. Citing an example where a specific media outlet was asked by Representative Lee Jae-myung to cancel a press award but failed to respond, the reality of the media subservient to power was criticized.

A Kim Eo-jun survey showed that Lee Jae-myung's approval rating among those in their 20s was only in the 10% range, with negative evaluations reaching the 80% range regardless of gender. An analysis suggested this is because the 2030 generation, who will live in the future, has judged the current government to be a ruinous one that cannot guarantee their future.

These indicators show that the sentiment of judging the current government is spreading among the 2030 generation. It was predicted that if even the 6070 generation abandons support, the approval rating could plummet further.

Criticism has been raised that Assemblyman Park Ji-won, despite having supported the bill to adjust investigation powers between the police and prosecution, is now making irresponsible remarks like 'we can neither kill nor save the police.' This was pointed out as a blatant expression of how irresponsible the Democratic Party's politics are.

It was argued that the Democratic Party cannot escape responsibility for causing the current situation by only adjusting investigative powers without providing methods to control the police or granting the prosecution specialized investigative roles.

Regarding the lawsuit involving Assemblywoman Lee Jin-sook, a legal opinion stated that there is a very high probability of defamation being established. Previous precedents show cases where using contemptuous expressions such as 'like cockroaches' or 'a mob' towards politicians resulted in fines of 2 million won.

It was analyzed that comparing someone to Hitler could be judged as a defamatory expression beyond simple criticism, and this could be an important basis for establishing defamation.

Analysis suggests that expelling Assemblywoman Lee Jin-sook is realistically difficult. To expel a National Assembly member, a two-thirds vote of the total registered members is required, which the Democratic Party alone cannot achieve, and the People Power Party would not endorse the expulsion motion.

The Democratic Party's choice of a 'motion urging expulsion resolution' instead of an actual expulsion motion is interpreted as a political offensive to attack Assemblywoman Lee Jin-sook and incite public criticism without the political burden of actual expulsion.

Analysis suggests that an attempt to expel Assemblywoman Lee Jin-sook could be perceived as political repression and backfire. The case of former President Kim Young-sam was cited, who became politically active after being expelled from the National Assembly in 1979 and eventually became president.

It was pointed out that an attempt to expel Assemblywoman Lee Jin-sook could solidify his political standing and further engrave his arguments in the minds of the public.

The police's false conclusion and the deletion of public CCTV data in the Jeju missing person case became an issue. The missing person was found only about 100 meters from the reporting location, and the cell phone was on until its battery died after the report was filed. It is assessed that the person could have been saved if the police had actively used digital evidence such as cell tower information in the early stages of the disappearance.

However, the police simply closed the case, and public CCTV data was automatically deleted after the 30-day retention period, missing a crucial opportunity to secure evidence for the initial investigation. This was pointed out as a serious problem that goes beyond police negligence and undermines the credibility of the judicial system.

The danger that the police's exclusive investigative power could lead to a lack of surveillance for victimless crimes has been raised, emphasizing the necessity of 'Geomsuwonbok' (restoration of prosecutorial investigative powers). It was pointed out that while missing person cases are pursued due to family reports, for victimless crimes such as drugs, gambling, drunk driving, violations of political funding laws, and public election laws, if the police close the investigation, no one can look into it.

Following the Jeju missing person case, calls for the revival of the prosecution's supplementary investigative powers and the normalization of the investigative system are growing. This is presented as a measure to check the police's exclusive investigation and achieve substantial judicial justice.

It has been pointed out that the 'rule excluding illegally obtained evidence' has practical shortcomings in the current judicial system. If even one of ten pieces of evidence is deemed illegally obtained, the entire case can result in acquittal, even if the other nine pieces of evidence are valid. This is clearly demonstrated in cases where evidence becomes ineffective due to a failure to issue a Miranda warning, or drunk driving cases are acquitted due to unrecorded police handover documents.

While this principle is an important logic to prevent abuse of investigative power, it is also criticized for creating a disconnect with the realization of actual judicial justice. In other words, the problem is that formal procedural flaws can obscure the substantive truth.

The principle that the People Power Party Ethics Committee must be an independent decision-making body, separate from the Supreme Council, was emphasized. Concerns were raised that calls for lighter sanctions from some within the party could undermine the Ethics Committee's independence and ultimately lead to a decline in trust in the People Power Party.

It was pointed out that if the Ethics Committee is not operated fairly as an independent body and is swayed by internal political influence, it could be perceived as a 'bargaining tool.' The stance that wrongdoings must be disciplined according to principle was reaffirmed.

It is known that the People Power Party Ethics Committee's ruling was meticulously drafted with a strong legal basis in preparation for potential injunction lawsuits. It was explained that legal professionals were added to enhance the legal completeness of the ruling, and great care was taken in its legal composition, considering the possibility of a court dismissal.

This is evaluated as thorough preparation for any future legal disputes. It is, in effect, building a pre-emptive defense to prevent the Ethics Committee's decision from being overturned in court.

Criticism was raised that the direct election of party district chairpersons by party members, which is stipulated as a principle in the party constitution, has not been upheld. It was pointed out that previously, a system of indirect re-approval of party chairpersons through a small-group operating committee was prevalent and used to maintain the vested interests of incumbents.

The introduction of direct elections for party members is expected to strengthen responses to members' grievances and invigorate party activities, ultimately contributing to enhancing the party's fighting power. This is presented as a way to realize party-member-centric grassroots democracy and solidify the party's foundation.

Regarding the launch of Democratic Party TV and its broadcast times overlapping with Kim Eo-jun's show, it was analyzed as Representative Kim Min-seok's strategy to 'kill Kim Eo-jun' or 'weaken Kim Eo-jun.' By starting Democratic Party TV five minutes earlier than Kim Eo-jun's broadcast, the aim was to keep Democratic Party viewers from switching to Kim Eo-jun's show.

This is interpreted as an intention to reduce Kim Eo-jun's influence and preemptively block any backlash that might arise within the party's support base. Voices critical of Representative Kim Min-seok's actions were also raised, referencing the case of former President Roh Moo-hyun.

Analysis suggests that Democratic Party TV, operated by Assemblyman Kim Min-seok who holds nomination power, will be used as a tool to check Kim Eo-jun's broadcast and expand the party's organizational influence. It was even suggested that in a situation where Assemblyman Kim Min-seok holds nomination power, Democratic Party lawmakers might be compelled to subscribe to and 'like' Democratic Party TV.

This leads to suspicions that the party might count appearances on Democratic Party TV and reflect them in nominations. Consequently, Democratic Party TV is projected to become not just a party promotion channel, but an important means influencing internal party power relations and nominations.

The case of Jang Mi-ran revealed serious deficiencies in the police's functions for searching for missing persons and prevention. Despite the police having a duty not only as an investigative agency but also for preventing and searching for missing persons, the process in this case proved to be insufficient.

Systemic shortcomings, such as restrictions on warrantless location tracking for missing adults under current law, were also pointed out. However, the police's failure to take proper initial action, even though Jang Mi-ran was classified as disabled, making location tracking possible, makes it difficult to avoid criticism for a complacent response.

Prime Minister Han Deok-soo issued an urgent directive to the National Police Agency to separate the handling and closing of missing persons cases, but this has been criticized as not being a fundamental solution. It was pointed out as a superficial response, relying solely on written reports without communication with on-site practitioners and commanders.

Given the complexity and urgency of missing persons cases, merely separating administrative procedures has limitations in solving the problem, according to analysis. Voices are growing for the need to strengthen actual on-site capabilities and improve the system.

Supreme Court Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae emphasized the importance of controlling the arbitrary exercise of state power, asserting that the rule of law is a mechanism to control state power for four full years. This is interpreted as expressing concern about changes that undermine judicial independence, by referencing legal principles regarding the president's exercise of appointment power.

The Chief Justice clarified that the courts are the final bulwark against abuse of power and for protecting citizens' fundamental rights. This is read as a message warning of the social repercussions and crisis of democracy that would arise if judicial independence is undermined.

Judiciary Committee Chairperson Seo Young-gyo claimed that the investigative powers of prosecutors were not abolished but 'transferred to a central investigation agency.' However, this was criticized as demonstrating a lack of understanding of the judicial system for a chairperson of the Judiciary Committee.

It was pointed out that Seo's remarks were contrary to facts, as the investigative functions of the prosecution were not simply moved to another agency, but the scope and authority of investigations themselves were significantly reduced.

The decline in approval ratings for the government and ruling party has been attributed to a loss of policy trust and reduced expectations for the future. Criticism was raised that the president's policies have been inconsistent and subject to rapid changes, undermining trust in the government. Furthermore, it was pointed out that the ruling party is overly focused on publicity-oriented organizational strategies and fails to present substantial policy achievements or a vision for the future.

Analysis suggests that the public is fatigued by frequent policy changes and has given up on expectations for the current administration due to uncertainty about the future. Voices are growing that regaining policy trust and presenting a clear future vision are essential for an approval rating rebound.

It is expected that if the Lee Jae-myung government's approval rating declines, it will attempt artificial measures such as 'constitutional amendment' to secure state power. Analysis suggests a high probability of using a constitutional amendment card to change the political landscape when there is political necessity, such as a general election.

Considering the Lee Jae-myung government's situation, which must find a breakthrough between legal risks and livelihood issues, attempts to change the situation through constitutional amendment and political realignment are presented as sufficiently plausible scenarios. Concerns are also raised that this could be used as a means to escape political crises.

Analysis suggests that writer Yoo Si-min criticizes Representative Lee Jae-myung because he believes the possibility of a change of government is low under Lee Jae-myung's system. This is a significant point showing the deepening internal rifts within the broader pro-government camp.

It was suggested that Yoo Si-min's criticism will accelerate the division of supporters regarding Lee Jae-myung's leadership, and the conservative camp views this as a strategy to promote internal strife, thereby increasing the chances of a change of government.