Law Hindered by Regulations... Conflict of Interest Law for National Assembly Members Useless Without Enforcement Standards

Law Effective from May 30 This Year... No Related National Assembly Rules, 'Implementation Meaningless'
Demand for Disclosure of Lawmakers' Private Interests Denied Due to Inadequate Assembly Rules
Civic Groups Say "National Assembly Neglects Duty"

[Asia Economy Reporter Naju-seok] Although the National Assembly Law to prevent conflicts of interest was established in the National Assembly following the real estate speculation scandal involving employees of the Korea Land and Housing Corporation (LH), there is criticism that it is ineffective due to the absence of detailed National Assembly rules. Even if the law is enforced, there is no basis for it to operate without detailed regulations. The argument that the law and related detailed rules should be revised simultaneously is gaining traction.

At the plenary session held at the National Assembly on the 28th, the amendment to the National Assembly Act to establish a branch of the National Assembly building in Sejong City is being passed. Photo by Yoon Dong-joo doso7@

According to political circles on the 7th, the amended National Assembly Law to prevent conflicts of interest among members of the National Assembly came into effect on the 30th of last month. However, the 'National Assembly Rules' containing detailed implementation guidelines have not yet been established. The amended National Assembly Law requires members of the National Assembly and their families to register their interests with the Ethics Review Advisory Committee, and to report if they become aware that an organization related to the member may gain benefits or suffer disadvantages during agenda reviews, audits, or investigations. Additionally, the member can be replaced based on the opinion of the Ethics Review Advisory Committee.

The problem is that only the related law has been passed, but the detailed National Assembly rules responsible for specifics have not been prepared even after the law’s enforcement. For example, according to Article 34-2, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 6 of the National Assembly Law, if a member or their family owns stocks, shares, or capital in a corporation, they must register if the amount or ratio exceeds the threshold set by the National Assembly rules. However, since the National Assembly rules have not been established, there are no concrete standards. A National Assembly official explained, "The registration procedure stipulated by the National Assembly Law was followed, but since the National Assembly rules were not passed, registration for matters regulated by those rules was not accepted."

Similarly, even if situations arise during legislative activities where conflicts of interest are a concern, there remain blind spots. There are no criteria for how much shareholding constitutes a conflict of interest during audits, or how close a member must have been to a department under audit to be considered a private interest, because the National Assembly rules have not been established. This leaves a 'gap' with no standards. Consequently, the original purpose of preventing conflicts of interest as stipulated by the law cannot be achieved.

The National Assembly’s failure to establish related rules is criticized as close to dereliction of duty. The related National Assembly Law was passed in the plenary session in April last year, but no follow-up measures have been taken for over a year. The related bill stipulates in its supplementary provisions that all members must register matters related to conflicts of interest by April 15 of this year, and the Ethics Review Advisory Committee must review and report on conflicts of interest by May 15.

A representative from the People's Solidarity for Participatory Democracy commented, "Although there are many potential conflicts of interest involving stocks or shares owned by members of the National Assembly, the absence of related regulations making registration impossible is tantamount to the National Assembly neglecting its duties."

The issue of disclosure is also controversial. Previously, the People's Solidarity for Participatory Democracy requested disclosure of members’ private interest information from the National Assembly Secretariat but was denied. According to the organization, the Secretariat cited the reason for non-disclosure as ‘the related rules have not been enacted.’ This has been criticized as contrary to the purpose of the law. In fact, the National Assembly Law stipulates that regarding private interest registration, "matters concerning the member themselves among the following items may be disclosed to the extent that information disclosure is not prohibited." Despite this provision for disclosure, disclosure was refused on the grounds that there are no National Assembly rules related to disclosure.

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