Are Investigative Agencies and Broadcasters Defended? Why Ruling and Opposition Parties Cling to the Chairs of the Public Administration and Broadcasting Committees

Democrats See Disadvantage if Police Also Go to Ruling Party After Prosecution
Guaranteeing Media Independence Tied to Public Opinion Battle

Democrats: "We Take Both... Concede Judiciary and Steering Committees"
People Power: "Speaker Is Democrat... Judiciary Committee Is Our Share"

Kwon Seongdong: "Media Union Controls Everything... How Will Ruling Party Seize Broadcasting?"

[Asia Economy Reporters Oh Ju-yeon and Geum Bo-ryeong] The Democratic Party of Korea and the People Power Party agreed to finalize negotiations on the composition of the National Assembly, including the chairmanships of standing committees, by Constitution Day on the 17th. However, they clashed once again over the allocation of the Administrative Safety Committee and the Science, Technology, Information and Broadcasting Communications Committee. Both parties claim they should take charge of these committees, citing "political neutrality of the police" and "guaranteeing the independence of the media" as reasons. Ultimately, there is speculation that a mediation plan dividing the two standing committees between the parties may be arranged.

According to ruling and opposition parties on the 14th, the Democratic Party insists on taking the Administrative Safety Committee and the Science, Technology, Information and Broadcasting Communications Committee while conceding the Judiciary Committee and the Steering Committee to the ruling party. The People Power Party is urging the Democratic Party to make a clear choice between the two.

Park Hong-geun, the floor leader of the Democratic Party of Korea, is attending the policy coordination meeting held at the National Assembly on the 14th and delivering opening remarks. Photo by Yoon Dong-joo doso7@

Kwon Seong-dong, floor leader of the People Power Party, said on the radio on the 14th, "The Administrative Safety Committee has traditionally been held by the ruling party," adding, "But the Democratic Party wants to take both the Administrative Safety Committee and the Science, Technology, Information and Broadcasting Communications Committee, so negotiations have stalled."

The Democratic Party argues that to prevent attempts to control the police and to protect the police's independence and neutrality, it must take charge of the Administrative Safety Committee, which oversees the police. However, analysts suggest that underlying this is concern that if the ruling party controls not only the Judiciary Committee but also the Administrative Safety Committee, it would be difficult to control not only the prosecution but also the police, the two main investigative agencies.

Regarding this, Floor Leader Kwon emphasized, "It is natural for the Judiciary Committee to be held by a party different from the Speaker," and said, "This is not a concession as the Democratic Party claims." Since Kim Jin-pyo of the Democratic Party was elected Speaker of the National Assembly, it is natural that the Judiciary Committee belongs to the People Power Party. This underscores the ruling party's position that it cannot concede either the Judiciary Committee or the Administrative Safety Committee.

Professor Park Sang-byeong of Inha University said, "In the case of the Administrative Safety Committee, since the government has control over the prosecution, if it also holds both investigative agencies, the opposition party will have no power." He added, "It will be difficult for the People Power Party to continue insisting on the Administrative Safety Committee."

The Science, Technology, Information and Broadcasting Communications Committee is considered non-negotiable due to issues of broadcasting and media independence. The Democratic Party insists it cannot concede this committee to the People Power Party, citing freedom and independence of broadcasting and the media, while the People Power Party believes the media environment deteriorated under the Moon Jae-in administration.

From the Democratic Party's perspective, if the ruling party takes charge of the Science, Technology, Information and Broadcasting Communications Committee, it fears being at a severe disadvantage in public opinion battles. On the day, Democratic Party floor leader Park Hong-geun criticized, "The ruling People Power Party is being unreasonable and greedy in insisting on taking the Science, Technology, Information and Broadcasting Communications Committee," calling it "an open intention to seize control of broadcasting." In response, Floor Leader Kwon countered, "The Democratic Party did not make efforts to improve the National Assembly's operation for five years during the Moon Jae-in administration to improve the broadcasting law governance structure," arguing that the 'tilted playing field' in the media must be corrected after the past five years.

Floor Leader Kwon also sparked controversy by saying that broadcasting is controlled by the media union.

Kwon Seong-dong, Acting Leader of the People Power Party, is attending the Supreme Council meeting held at the National Assembly on the 14th. Photo by Yoon Dong-joo doso7@

Regarding the defense of the Science, Technology, Information and Broadcasting Communications Committee, Floor Leader Kwon said, "How could the ruling party seize control of broadcasting?" adding, "KBS and MBC are all controlled by the media union under the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions. Honestly, to be frank."

He questioned, "Although the president has the authority to appoint the president of the broadcasting stations, do you think the union members, who make up the majority and belong to the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions, would listen to the president?" This drew backlash from the host. Despite criticism that his remarks were against journalists reporting according to their personal conscience, he responded, "From our perspective, it is so."

After the People Power Party's Supreme Council meeting that morning, when meeting with reporters, Floor Leader Kwon explained, "I spoke frankly," and said, "I was not criticizing individual reporters but was referring to the management."

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