"Did Yoo Si-min Get the Facts Wrong?" Controversy Over Cho Kuk's Proxy Exam and National Security Law Remarks

Yoo Si-min "National Security Law Failed Because of Hannara Party"
Lee Bu-young, Former Chairman of Open Uri Party, "Completely False Claim"
On 'Alileo' "Open Book Any Materials or References"
George Washington University, USA "Unauthorized Materials Are Cheating"

Yoo Si-min, Chairman of the Roh Moo-hyun Foundation. Photo by JTBC, captured from the New Year's special debate broadcast.

[Asia Economy Reporter Han Seung-gon] The authenticity of claims made by Yoo Si-min, chairman of the Roh Moo-hyun Foundation, has become a subject of controversy.

Previously, Chairman Yoo stated in a TV debate that the National Security Act could not be abolished in 2004 due to the ruling party at the time, the Grand National Party. However, Lee Boo-young, a former member of the Uri Party (the predecessor of the Democratic Party of Korea) who led the negotiations between the ruling and opposition parties at the time, refuted Yoo’s claim as 'false.'

Additionally, Yoo argued that former Minister of Justice Cho Kuk’s son’s alleged proxy-taking of online exams during his studies at a U.S. university could not be considered problematic.

However, the university is known to strictly enforce regulations on online exams, managing and operating them rigorously. If the proxy exam allegations are true, it is reportedly serious enough to warrant disciplinary action, contradicting Yoo’s claim that there is no issue.

Lee Bu-young, Chairman of the Foundation for Free Press Practice Photo by Yonhap News

◆ Yoo Si-min: "National Security Act abolition failed due to Grand National Party’s parliamentary occupation" vs Lee Boo-young: "Completely false... negotiations went smoothly"

Lee Boo-young, director of the Free Press Practice Foundation, posted on his Facebook on the 3rd, stating, "Yoo Si-min’s false claims must be corrected," and countered, "The failure of the four major reform bills in 2004 was due to the ruling party breaking the bipartisan agreement on the National Security Act amendment."

Lee previously served as chairman of the Uri Party, the predecessor of the Democratic Party of Korea, and led the bipartisan negotiations during the National Security Act controversy.

On the 2nd, Yoo appeared on JTBC’s New Year special debate and referred to the 'National Security Act controversy' in the National Assembly during the Roh Moo-hyun administration in 2004, claiming that the reform legislation failed because of the Grand National Party.

Yoo stated, "At the time, 152 members of the Uri Party and 13 members of the Democratic Labor Party, totaling 165, attempted to pass reform bills including the complete abolition of the National Security Act, the Press Act, the Past History Act, and the Private School Act, but the Grand National Party completely occupied the National Assembly, causing failure."

However, Lee said, "This claim (Yoo’s statement) is completely false," pointing out, "The opposition party (Grand National Party) did not occupy the National Assembly, and the bipartisan negotiations proceeded smoothly."

He added, "The ruling party’s insistence on the complete abolition of the National Security Act caused the breakdown of negotiations," and raised his voice, "After the failure of the National Security Act amendment, the Uri Party split and lost power."

Lee emphasized, "If the agreement had passed, the basic rights of the people, especially freedom of the press, assembly, thought, and association, would have been greatly expanded," and reiterated, "However, Uri Party floor leader Cheon Jeong-bae and Yoo Si-min, known as the ruling party’s key figures, strongly advocated for the abolition of the National Security Act, causing the amendment bill to fall through."

He lamented, "I was pressured by hardliners to resign as party chairman," and said, "Few people have as much resentment against the National Security Act as I do, having been detained four times under it, but the National Security Act amendment work, which was truly beneficial to the ruling party, ended with my ousting," expressing that the Uri Party lost the momentum to push reforms.

He continued, "The Roh Moo-hyun administration also had to go downhill. As approval ratings fell, the momentum to advance inter-Korean relations diminished," and countered, "Even now, Yoo Si-min and other advocates for abolishing the National Security Act do not admit their mistakes and continue to make false claims."

Yoo Si-min, Chairman of the Roh Moo-hyun Foundation.

◆ Yoo Si-min: "Open-book exams allow reference to any materials" vs The George Washington University: "Unauthorized materials constitute academic misconduct"

Amid growing controversy over the authenticity of Yoo’s claims regarding the so-called 'National Security Act controversy,' another dispute has emerged.

On the 31st of last month, Yoo criticized the indictment of former Minister of Justice Cho Kuk on charges of obstruction of business for allegedly taking two online exams on behalf of his son, Cho, at a U.S. university between November and December 2016, arguing that the charges could not be applied.

Among the 12 charges brought against Cho, who was indicted without detention that day, was the allegation of taking his son’s university exams on his behalf.

According to the prosecution’s indictment, Cho and his wife are suspected of interfering with the university’s grading process by solving online exam questions for their son, who was attending The George Washington University in the U.S. in 2016.

Regarding this, Yoo claimed, "This was a 20-question open-book quiz," and argued, "Since it was an open-book exam that the son accessed, any materials could be referenced," implying that the charges could not be substantiated.

He added, "Whether the parents helped in the open-book exam is unknown, but the indictment was based solely on suspicion of parental involvement in the online open-book exam," and criticized, "This charge is frivolous."

Former Minister of Justice Cho Kuk, who is accused of abuse of authority and obstruction of the exercise of rights in connection with the 'Yoo Jae-su inspection cover-up suspicion,' is heading to his car after the arrest warrant was dismissed on the morning of the 27th at Seoul Eastern Detention Center in Songpa-gu.
[Image source=Yonhap News]

However, The George Washington University issued a statement regarding the proxy exam controversy involving Cho Kuk, stating that it constitutes a 'violation of university regulations,' contradicting Yoo’s claim that the open-book format means there is no problem.

According to the JoongAng Ilbo on the 4th, Tim Dott, academic advisor at the Elliott School of International Affairs, where Cho’s son attended, interpreted the university’s regulations to mean that the prosecution’s allegations of Cho conspiring with his son to complete online exams constitute 'academic misconduct.'

The university regulations specify that "academic misconduct includes copying another student’s answers during exams, using unauthorized materials or information, receiving unauthorized assistance, or collaborating with others without permission."

Regarding the open-book controversy, he said, "There is no dispute or doubt in American universities that this constitutes academic misconduct," and added, "If there is clear and convincing evidence that a student copied the exam questions to a parent, or that the parent provided information or answers which were then used in the exam, the university should impose appropriate disciplinary measures."

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.