Side Effects of Investigative Authority Adjustment, Lee Jae-myung's Approval Rating Decline, and Call for Stronger Judicial Independence

With the abolition of the prosecution's direct investigation and security investigation powers, the police have now taken full responsibility for public welfare investigations. However, concerns are being raised that this will lead to severe regional polarization of public welfare investigative capabilities.

In particular, the investigative burden on front-line police officers is rapidly increasing, and the disparities in specialized investigative capabilities are also widening. The interlocutor predicted that the gap in case-handling capabilities would grow between the Seoul metropolitan area and other regions.

Currently, investigators in the Seoul metropolitan area are overloaded, handling over 70 cases per person. Conversely, local police often express difficulty due to a lack of experience in investigating economic crimes such as embezzlement or breach of trust.

It is pointed out that this acts as a limitation, making it difficult to respond to the expertise of defense lawyers, and could lead to a general weakening of police investigative capabilities.

Since the adjustment of prosecutorial and police investigative authority, criticism has arisen that a privileged class beyond the reach of investigative agencies has emerged: National Assembly members.

Most cases involving National Assembly members are filed as accusations, and the current system, where police non-indictment decisions can terminate an investigation, is criticized for granting National Assembly members privileges to defend against judicial risks. The interlocutor criticized the problems of this system, citing the case of Assemblyman Jeon Jae-soo.

The dismissal rate of recent comprehensive special prosecutor investigations, conducted over 180 days, reached 65%, three times higher than that of general prosecutors. This has led to criticism that special prosecutors are not properly fulfilling their role as legal investigative bodies.

In particular, regarding Special Prosecutor Kwon Chang-young's remarks such as 'the start of a war against seditious forces,' the interlocutor pointed out that such language is not that of a legal professional and is a self-confession that the investigation is political, not based on legal requirements.

Such remarks further fueled suspicions that special prosecutors are using investigations for political purposes rather than discussions related to legal requirements and evidence.

The interlocutor strongly criticized that conducting investigations with emotional language without legal basis violates the principles of the rule of law and asserted that the essential purpose of the special prosecutor system is being lost.

Legally, the National Assembly recommends three special inspectors, and the President appoints one of them. However, the ruling party maintains that special inspectors should be recommended according to the custom of bipartisan agreement.

In response, the host pointed out the contradiction in the current practice where the ruling party appoints a person recommended by the Democratic Party. It is criticized that if a person recommended by the ruling party were to be appointed as a special inspector, the special inspector system would not be able to achieve its original purpose of checking the President.

The special inspector system, established by the National Assembly to check the President, is highly unique in comparative law. The interlocutor mentioned that in the past, the Senior Secretary for Civil Affairs handled this oversight function and criticized the current system as a waste of public funds and ineffective as a power check mechanism.

It is argued that in a structure where both the special inspector, created to check power, and the special prosecutor, created to investigate power, are ultimately appointed by the ruling party leader, their meaning is difficult to find.

Assemblywoman Lee Jin-sook filed a defamation lawsuit against the leader of the Democratic Party, sparking controversy over the boundaries between politicians' freedom of expression and personal attacks. Assemblywoman Lee Jin-sook took legal action against the opposing side's remark 'female Hitler.'

The host and interlocutor pointed out that considering the level of expression permissible for politicians and the historical weight of the word 'Hitler,' the remark could constitute excessive personal attack.

The proposed legislative bill for suspension of duties in the National Assembly has been criticized as a totalitarian method. The interlocutor cited people's courts and retroactive legislation as the two biggest characteristics of totalitarianism.

This, he argued, violates the modern legal principles of prohibiting retroactive legislation and legality of crimes and punishments, which applies law created later to past actions.

In particular, the interlocutor strongly criticized that punishing past actions without legal basis is similar to the totalitarian rule used by Hitler and emphasized that such behavior is unacceptable in a democratic society.

After the death of Ven. Myungjin, former President Moon Jae-in and Democratic Party of Korea Chairman Lee Jae-myung, among other political figures, expressed condolences, drawing critical perspectives. The host pointed out that as a religious figure who should have severed ties with worldly affairs and dedicated himself to asceticism, Ven. Myungjin had made many political statements.

Furthermore, questions were raised about the appropriateness of political figures expressing condolences for a person who 'died while freediving,' leading to a discussion on the qualifications of public figures and the limits of political involvement by religious figures.

It was pointed out that while religious figures are allowed to express political opinions, it is different for them to intervene in politics using their religious authority or to advocate for specific factional logic. The interlocutor Hwang Sung-wook emphasized that this violates the principle of separation of church and state.

In particular, selective justice, which is critical only of conservative governments, was highlighted as a problem, and the stance was expressed that religious figures' political statements should not be swayed by factional logic.

It has been argued that the left-wing camp's practice of forcing mourning and grief under the pretext of specific deaths runs counter to democratic principles. The interlocutor Hwang Sung-wook criticized this coercion as a totalitarian act aimed at achieving political objectives.

He cited the past example of the Thai tsunami, where excessive emphasis on grief by the media severely damaged the tourism industry, explaining the negative impact of forced grief on society as a whole.

Therefore, he emphasized that such forced mourning must be resolutely rejected, and attempts to manipulate emotions for political purposes must be resisted.

Lee Jae-myung, chairman of the Democratic Party of Korea, recorded a positive evaluation of 40.2% in a Realmeter survey, reaching a precarious level just before dropping into the 30% range. The gap with negative evaluations was 16.7 percentage points.

The interlocutor Lee Jun-woo raised concerns that if the approval rating falls into the 30% range, Chairman Lee Jae-myung's lame duck status could accelerate.

Lee Jae-myung's approval rating in the Honam region plunged by a staggering 21.2 percentage points, from 76.9% to 55.7%. This sharp drop is analyzed to be a result of multiple complex factors.

First, conflicts arising during the nomination process for pro-Lee supreme council members negatively impacted public sentiment in the Honam region. Allegations of proxy voting in the Honam region during the party convention were also cited as a reason for the decline in approval.

Furthermore, skepticism about the feasibility of semiconductor investment in Honam and a relative sense of marginalization in the Jeonbuk region are also understood to have been major factors in the withdrawal of support for Lee Jae-myung.

The fact that Chairman Lee Jae-myung blocked a Democratic Party member on social media after a heated exchange spread on online communities, sparking controversy. This led to criticism that Chairman Lee Jae-myung's actions contradicted his previous emphasis on communication and his actual behavior.

A constitutional amendment to change the presidential term system to a four-year, two-term system received over half of the support with 50.9% in favor. However, opposition to retroactively applying this to the incumbent president was overwhelmingly high at 61.7%.

In particular, 'strongly oppose' responses reached 52.8%, suggesting that strong public resistance is expected if retroactive application for the incumbent president is forced.

This shows that while the necessity of a constitutional amendment is acknowledged, there is strong reluctance towards an amendment being pursued for the purpose of a specific individual's re-election.

Opposition to Chairman Lee Jae-myung's re-election amendment among people in their 20s and 30s was found to be very high. 68.7% of those aged 18 to 29 opposed it, and 58.3% of those in their 30s opposed it.

This means that negative sentiment towards Chairman Lee Jae-myung's re-election amendment is overwhelmingly present among young people.

The Democratic Party faces the possibility of this sentiment clashing with its efforts to regain the support of young people and pursue key tasks in the future.

A scene where Democratic Party members collectively bowed 90 degrees at a party meeting was revealed, sparking controversy. The participant compared this to North Korean citizens bowing 90 degrees in front of Kim Il-sung's statue, criticizing it as a dictatorial and coercive form of greeting.

Criticism was also raised regarding Chairman Kim Min-seok's attempt to shift responsibility for this controversy to the public relations director.

The Democratic Party's announcement to assign party positions to all members has sparked controversy over its effectiveness. The participant questioned whether giving party positions to all members truly has meaning.

Concerns are raised that the scarcity of party positions will be lost, and consequently, the accountability associated with party positions may also weaken. This reflects a critical view that it could lead to an overall lowering of standards within the party organization.

Supreme Court Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae emphasized the strict exercise of judicial power and the substantive implementation of the rule of law at an event hosted by the Korean Bar Association. He stated that it is the court's responsibility to strictly exercise judicial power, entrusted by the people, in accordance with the Constitution, laws, and conscience.

Chief Justice Cho also expressed his determination to pursue swift and fair trials without wavering, based on public trust.

This demonstrates the Chief Justice's strong will to uphold the independence of the judiciary, protect the rights and interests of the people, and firmly establish the rule of law throughout society.