People's Solidarity for Participatory Democracy "Ministry of Justice's refusal to submit indictment on 'Ulsan Mayor election interference suspicion' is hard to accept"

Participation Solidarity Photo by Yonhap News

[Asia Economy Reporter Jeong Dong-hoon] The People's Solidarity for Participatory Democracy criticized the Ministry of Justice's decision not to disclose the indictment in the 'Cheongwadae Ulsan Mayor Election Interference Case' as an "unconvincing decision."

On the 5th, the People's Solidarity for Participatory Democracy stated in a commentary, "The 'Ulsan Mayor Election Interference Suspicion Case' is a case in which 13 high-ranking officials, including a former senior secretary of Cheongwadae and the current Ulsan mayor, were indicted on serious charges of violating the Public Official Election Act by interfering in the election, drawing significant public interest," adding, "Given that former key officials of Cheongwadae have been indicted on charges of interfering in an election, which is the core of democracy, concerns about protecting the honor and privacy of those involved or the risk of disclosing suspect facts cannot be considered more important than the public's right to know."

They continued, "The Ministry of Justice's reason for non-disclosure, citing 'protection of individual honor or privacy,' is utterly unconvincing," and pointed out, "Even if there were sufficient reasons, it is difficult to accept applying this regulation specifically to this case."

The People's Solidarity for Participatory Democracy also emphasized, "The Ministry of Justice's decision to withhold disclosure cannot avoid criticism that it does not respect the National Assembly and the law (Article 4 of the Act on Testimony, Inspection, and Expertise in the National Assembly)," adding, "It goes against existing precedents and restricts the public's right to know and the opportunity to judge this case."

They added, "Minister of Justice Choo Mi-ae argues that disclosing indictments is a wrong practice that needs correction, but such a judgment should be made by the National Assembly, which has the legislative authority to amend the National Assembly Testimony and Inspection Act, rather than by the Minister of Justice, who is merely the head of a single department."

They concluded, "Ultimately, this is a matter for the court to judge strictly, and it is neither a matter for the Ministry of Justice to block the disclosure of the indictment nor something that can be concealed," demanding, "The Ministry of Justice must comply with the National Assembly's request to submit the indictment."

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