[2020 National Audit] "Why Do Interpretations Differ for Cho Kuk and Choo Mi-ae?" "It Is True There Are Limitations"

October 15 Political Affairs Committee Audit... Yoon Jae-ok "If the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission Makes Political Interpretations Depending on the Situation, Trust Will Decline"

On the 15th, Jeon Hyun-hee, Chairperson of the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission, attended the National Assembly's Political Affairs Committee session for the audit of the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission and took the witness oath. Photo by Yoon Dong-joo doso7@

[Asia Economy Reporter Moon Chaeseok] During the National Assembly audit, a question was raised regarding the National Rights Commission’s differing interpretations on conflict of interest in the investigations of former Minister of Justice Cho Kuk’s family and Minister of Justice Choo Mi-ae’s duties and her son’s preferential treatment allegations.

On the 15th, Yoon Jae-ok, a member of the National Assembly’s Political Affairs Committee from the People Power Party, asked during the audit, "Is it true that the facts were not properly verified during former Minister Cho’s case, but were properly confirmed during Minister Choo’s case?"

Chairperson Jeon Hyun-hee of the Rights Commission responded, "Both former Minister Cho and Minister Choo had potential conflicts of interest."

Yoon asked, "Former Minister Cho’s case did not involve specific fact verification, but Minister Choo’s case did, right?" Chairperson Jeon acknowledged, "Yes."

Yoon questioned, "Why do some cases get verified and others do not? Realistically, it is not easy for the Rights Commission to verify the facts of various conflicts of interest. How will you verify specific facts for each potential conflict of interest case going forward?"

Chairperson Jeon replied, "Your point is valid. We request cooperation on fact verification from the Ministry of Justice and the prosecution, and base our interpretations on their responses, but it is true that there are clear limitations."

Yoon criticized, "The Rights Commission cannot be free from criticism that it interpreted the law differently depending on political circumstances. If the criteria for fact verification and interpretation are not clear and political interpretations are made depending on the situation, how much will the trust in the Rights Commission decline?"

Earlier, from the 15th to the 17th of last month, the Rights Commission issued explanatory statements for three consecutive days in an unusual move after opposition parties criticized its interpretation that there was no conflict of interest in the investigation of Minister Choo’s duties and her son’s preferential treatment allegations.

While the Rights Commission acknowledged potential conflicts of interest during the investigation of former Minister Cho’s family, it issued an opposite interpretation this time, leading to concentrated attacks from opposition parties labeling it the "Regime Rights Commission." The Rights Commission has repeatedly stated that there is no difference in the basic principles.

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