Ruling and Opposition Parties Return to Square One on 'Broadcasting Act Amendment' at Science and ICT Committee Subcommittee... Ruling Party Sets Official Position for Re-discussion (Comprehensive)

August So-called Formation Followed by First Meeting Between Ruling and Opposition Parties
Differences Over Public Broadcasting Governance Reform
Ruling Party Decides on Party Line, Plans Further Discussion

Cho Seung-rae, chairman of the National Assembly's Subcommittee on Science, ICT, Broadcasting and Communications, is presiding over the 3rd Agenda Coordination Committee meeting on the "Google In-App Payment Prevention Act" (Partial Amendment to the Telecommunications Business Act) held at the National Assembly on the 20th. Members of the People Power Party did not attend this meeting. Photo by Yoon Dong-joo doso7@

[Asia Economy Reporter Park Jun-yi] On the 24th, the Information and Communication Broadcasting Bill Review Subcommittee (2nd Subcommittee) under the National Assembly’s Science, Technology, Information and Broadcasting Communications Committee, which had been continuously stalled since the so-called reorganization in August, was normalized. Lawmakers from the ruling party made a sudden decision to participate in the bill subcommittee that day. However, during the subcommittee meeting, members from both parties clashed sharply over the details of the bill.

The National Assembly’s Science and Technology Committee held the 2nd Subcommittee on this day and began reviewing 25 bills, including partial amendments to the Broadcasting Act. At the 2nd Subcommittee meeting held on the 15th, ruling party lawmakers from the People Power Party (PPP) all boycotted the meeting, but they agreed to attend the subcommittee to block the passage of the Broadcasting Act.

Previously, the ruling party demanded the chairmanship of the 2nd Subcommittee, which oversees the Korea Communications Commission, but the majority party, the Democratic Party, appointed its own whip, lawmaker Jo Seung-rae, as the subcommittee chair. In response, the ruling party boycotted the subcommittee meetings.

A ruling party official said, "If we leave it as it is, the majority Democratic Party will pass the bill at will, so (ruling party lawmakers) plan to attend the meeting and strongly protest," adding, "We will expose the unfairness of the Democratic Party’s proposal and fulfill our responsibilities as the government and ruling party."

During the subcommittee meeting, an amendment to the Broadcasting Act focusing on improving the governance structure of public broadcasting was discussed. Since the ruling and opposition parties showed differing views on the bill’s content, the operation of the subcommittee is expected to be difficult. In fact, during the subcommittee session, loud exchanges occurred between lawmakers from both parties inside the meeting room.

The opposition emphasized its determination to pass the Broadcasting Act during this regular session of the National Assembly. Before the subcommittee meeting, opposition members of the Science and Technology Committee held a press conference at the National Assembly, stating, "From today, the Democratic Party will begin institutional reforms to guarantee the independence and neutrality of public broadcasting," and "We will move forward boldly toward amending the Broadcasting Act." Lawmaker Jo Seung-rae said, "The bill will include measures to improve governance so that public broadcasting belongs to the people, not controlled by any particular political faction, and to allow public participation in the appointment process of the president."

[Image source=Yonhap News]

However, ruling party members of the Science and Technology Committee issued a statement during the subcommittee meeting, saying, "The Democratic Party has revealed its intention to forcibly pass the Broadcasting Act amendment in the Science and Technology Committee’s broadcasting subcommittee," and "The that the Democratic Party is trying to pass is clearly a ‘law for the permanent control of public broadcasting by the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions’ media union.’" They moved to block the bill.

They advocated for the privatization of public broadcasting. The members stated, "Since MBC has also fallen into a labor union-controlled broadcasting rather than public broadcasting, privatization would be reasonable," and emphasized, "Among major OECD countries such as the UK, France, Germany, and Japan, except for France’s public broadcasting where the government holds 100% of shares, governments do not hold shares in public broadcasting. Therefore, Korea should ultimately move toward a one public, many private broadcasting system."

They also said they would recommend the president exercise the veto power if the opposition forcibly passes the bill. The members said, "Even if it passes the Science and Technology Committee, it must undergo strict scrutiny in the Legislation and Judiciary Committee," and "The Broadcasting Act passed unilaterally without bipartisan consultation will be recorded in history as a symbol of parliamentary tyranny, so we have no choice but to recommend the president exercise the veto."

Both parties failed to narrow their differences in the subcommittee that day and decided to finalize their party positions. Park Sung-joong, the People Power Party’s Science and Technology Committee whip, said in a back briefing after the subcommittee, "Our party’s individual proposal was the one we presented when we were the opposition," adding, "We asked for time to set a party position rather than individual members, so I am sharing the overall opinion."

He continued, "The Democratic Party decided on a party position through the ‘25-member Steering Committee,’ so we will also internally discuss and separately present the ruling party’s position," and criticized, "When the Democratic Party was in opposition, they insisted on a special majority system with an 11-member structure, but after President Moon Jae-in was elected, that disappeared."

In response, opposition whip lawmaker Jo said, "Whether or not a party position is set, I think it is not very meaningful to discuss," and "We understand it as a matter of what choice we make and plan to proceed quickly."

He added, "The name of the (steering) committee is not an important issue. The key is from which entities recommendations will be received to ensure diversity in board recommendations," explaining, "A consensus has been formed that it is necessary to guarantee diversity, objectivity, and independence in personnel recommendations."

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