People Power Party Ethics Committee Disciplines Members… Lee Jae-myung Clashes with Judiciary Over Supreme Court Justice Nominations

The four disciplined members each had different reasons for their disciplinary action, and this decision was made independently by the Ethics Committee, not the party leadership.

Political commentator Song Guk-geon emphasized the suddenness of the announcement, stating, "They suddenly announced the disciplinary actions in the evening." This disciplinary decision is seen as a strong expression of the Ethics Committee's will to establish party discipline.

While expulsion requires a resolution from the general assembly of lawmakers, suspension of party membership can be decided directly by the Ethics Committee, allowing for swift processing.

Commentator Song Guk-geon said, "Suspension of party membership was a more appropriate level, politically and legally, both within the party and externally, and they judged it quite well." During the disciplinary period, the lawmakers will have an opportunity for self-reflection, and their disciplinary record is likely to be a disadvantage in the process of future nominations.

In response, the People Power Party's Ethics Committee has thoroughly prepared its legal defense strategy, including bringing in new lawyers from legal backgrounds.

Commentator Song Guk-geon explained, "They brought in a new lawyer from a legal background. They brought in a new lawyer, so this disciplinary level was decided after a lot of legal research and review." He stated that the Ethics Committee conducted sufficient legal review, considering past similar cases.

Lawmakers who have had their party membership suspended are expected to face significant difficulties in securing nominations for the next general election. The People Power Party is strengthening the voice of its members by replacing district committee chairs and introducing a responsible party member vote, and a disciplinary record will be a major obstacle to gaining party trust.

Commentator Song Guk-geon said, "In that situation, even if the discipline is lifted before the general election, it will be quite difficult to get nominated." Even if the discipline is lifted, it will not be easy to exercise nomination rights under the new district committee chairman system, which is expected to effectively block their path to nomination.

Therefore, disciplined lawmakers will not only face difficulties in managing their constituencies but will also find it harder to secure competitiveness under the party's new nomination system.

The minister's side is refusing to disclose the record, claiming 'disclosure restrictions'.

Commentator Song Guk-geon pointed out, "Where are the restrictions on his own military service record? He just needs to disclose it." He added that avoiding disclosure to prove innocence would make it difficult to avoid political criticism.

The head of the Military Manpower Administration and the minister evaded specific answers to related questions, citing ongoing investigations.

Commentator Song Guk-geon and the host directly asked, "(To ruling party lawmakers or officials) Have you ever allowed access? No." Despite these denials, the allegations continue.

Typically, if the preparation team identifies problems, it is common practice to provide information in advance to ruling party lawmakers to seek cooperation.

Commentator Song Guk-geon explained, "Typically, if the preparation team identifies such problems, they ask for cooperation from ruling party lawmakers. It is common practice to provide information in advance, saying that these issues could become points of contention, to seek cooperation." He pointed out that specific mentions of 'red lines' and other concrete circumstances could be seen as evidence that the military service record was indeed accessed.

This could be seen as leaking classified information and raises concerns that it could undermine the government's principle of North Korean denuclearization.

Commentator Song Guk-geon criticized, "He actually increased the number. He said there are 80 to 120. This is a statement that gives up on North Korean denuclearization." He pointed out that the minister's remarks could be interpreted as effectively acknowledging North Korea's nuclear possession, contrary to the government's denuclearization stance.

Concerns are raised that such remarks could send the wrong signal to the international community and have an adverse effect at a time when North Korea should be encouraged to abandon its nuclear weapons.

Minister Ahn Gyu-baek's opposition to nuclear development and the deployment of U.S. tactical nuclear weapons has drawn strong criticism. Commentator Song Guk-geon criticized this stance as a national security policy that disregards the safety of the people and is subservient to the Kim Jong-un regime.

Song said, "We cannot develop nuclear weapons. We should not accept the deployment of U.S. tactical nuclear weapons. Then the people are completely exposed to Kim Jong-un's nuclear weapons, forced to live anxious days." He pointed out that this remark goes against the demand for self-help measures to protect one's own citizens.

At a time when strong security policies are needed to protect the public, the minister's remarks are criticized for increasing public anxiety and raising doubts about the government's commitment to security.

Consequently, there are growing calls for a cautious approach, as this could weaken South Korea's defense capabilities and will against North Korea's nuclear threat.

A conflict of interest arises because Judge Kim Min-ki's husband is a constitutional court justice appointed by Lee Jae-myung.

Commentator Song Guk-geon pointed out, "He avoided it because he wasn't given the Supreme Court justice he wanted," analyzing that Lee is resisting Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae's opposition and trying to appoint a person he prefers.

This could be seen as an attempt to effectively neutralize the Chief Justice's constitutional power to nominate.

Commentator Song Guk-geon criticized, "He will not send the appointment motion to the National Assembly but will reject it. So, 'do someone else, do someone else.' Then why does the Chief Justice have the power to nominate?" He pointed out that this is an attempt to break with existing practice and select only individuals preferred by the powerful, which could undermine judicial independence.

Commentator Song Guk-geon explained, "If he targets, the driving force that has rallied strong supporters until now has been the dismantling of the prosecution. Now a new target is needed. So this time, with the judiciary, he is framing it as judicial reform, and there is a hidden motive to rally strong supporters within that situation." This analysis suggests a hidden intention to rally strong supporters by setting judicial reform as a new target after the dismantling of the prosecution.

It's due to fears of a huge backlash if the impeachment were to be rejected by the Constitutional Court.

Commentator Song Guk-geon analyzed, "If the head of the judiciary were impeached and then rejected by the Constitutional Court, there would be a tremendous backlash, so they are not directly talking about impeachment, but rather saying 'step down.'" It appears they are conscious of the past case of Prime Minister Han Duck-soo's impeachment rejection and feel burdened by attempting to impeach the head of the judiciary.