Will the 'Conflict of Interest Prevention Act,' which failed during the Sewol Ferry incident, pass after the LH scandal?

Confirmed Need for Legislation Amid LH Land Speculation Scandal
Increased Possibility of Legislation as Ruling Party Emphasizes Necessity
"Conflict of Interest Prevention Act is a Preventive Measure, Additional Legislation Also Needed"

[Asia Economy Reporter Naju-seok] Can the Conflict of Interest Prevention Act pass amid allegations of land speculation by employees of Korea Land and Housing Corporation (LH)?

After the Sewol ferry disaster in 2014, the National Assembly passed the Act on the Prohibition of Improper Solicitation and Graft, commonly known as the Kim Young-ran Act. This was based on the judgment that widespread corruption in our society was a background factor in the loss of innocent lives in the Sewol sinking. The passage of this law was a strong expression of our society’s determination to overcome corruption. However, despite the legislative momentum at the time, the Conflict of Interest Prevention Act was not processed. The original draft name of the Kim Young-ran Act submitted by the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission was the “Act on the Prohibition of Improper Solicitation and Conflict of Interest Prevention for Public Officials,” but with the removal of the relevant content, the bill’s name also changed. The Kim Young-ran Act remains an incomplete law.

When the ruling and opposition parties agreed on the Kim Young-ran Act in January 2015, they decided to discuss the conflict of interest issue later.

[Image source=Yonhap News]

The Conflict of Interest Prevention Act, which was not discussed at the time, contained provisions prohibiting actions that pursue private interests by using undisclosed information or secrets. The recent LH land speculation controversy has brought up the issue belatedly because of this.

Kim Ki-sik, a former Democratic Party lawmaker who played a midwife role in the Kim Young-ran Act, stated in a report released at the end of the 19th National Assembly, “At the time of drafting the Political Affairs Committee’s alternative, there were many parts of the system related to conflict of interest prevention that needed improvement and insufficient discussion, so it was excluded for the time being,” adding, “Later, discussions continued narrowing down to two alternatives but no agreement was reached.” The then-opposition Democratic Party tried to resolve the conflict of interest issue through a reporting system, while the ruling party sought to prevent conflicts of interest through a recusal system.

The recusal system excludes judges with special interests from trials. At the time, there were significant doubts about the effectiveness of the recusal system. For example, in the case of an economic reporter whose family members work as executives in financial institutions or companies, the recusal grounds could be applied, raising concerns about excessive application. There were also criticisms that the prime minister’s children would have nowhere to get a job for this reason.

Subsequent discussions were expected, but the conflict of interest prevention provisions were repeatedly ignored. In the 20th National Assembly, related laws were proposed by the government and former Minsaeng Party lawmaker Chae I-bae, but no substantial discussions took place in the National Assembly, and the bills were discarded.

In the 21st National Assembly, the issue again failed to attract attention until it began to be spotlighted amid the LH scandal.

Will it be processed in the 21st National Assembly? Given the strong legislative will of the government and ruling party, the possibility of passage has increased.

Former lawmaker Kim also sees both the necessity and possibility of passage as higher. He told Asia Economy, “Since what LH employees did is a conflict of interest, this law should naturally be enacted,” adding, “The delay in legislation so far could be overcome early if the recusal system for conflict of interest duties is changed to a reporting system.”

However, he emphasized that the Conflict of Interest Prevention Act should not be seen as a panacea. He said, “The Conflict of Interest Prevention Act is a kind of preventive measure,” adding, “If confidential information acquired through official duties is used, punishment is already enforced, but since criminal penalties are strictly applied, it needs to be supplemented to allow broader interpretation.”

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