City Councilor Lee Jong-bae: "Refusal of Election Commission Audit is Illegal"... Prosecutor's Office to File Charges Against Chairman No Tae-ak and Others Today

Complaint Filed at Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office at 2 PM
Complaint Against No Tae-ak, Chairman of the Election Commission, and All Election Commissioners

The Central Election Commission, which is facing expanding allegations of preferential hiring involving children and siblings, has decided to refuse an audit by the Board of Audit and Inspection, and the chairman and commissioners of the Central Election Commission will be reported to the prosecution.

On the 4th at 2 p.m., Seoul City Council member Lee Jong-bae held a press conference in front of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office in Seocho-dong, Seoul, announcing plans to report Chairman No Tae-ak of the Central Election Commission and all commissioners to the prosecution on charges including violation of the Board of Audit and Inspection Act.

Lee said, "The Central Election Commission's refusal to undergo an audit by the Board of Audit and Inspection is a clear illegal act, and I will report the chairman and all commissioners for violating the Board of Audit and Inspection Act."

Noh Tae-ak, Chairman of the Central Election Commission, is heading to the chairman's office after a meeting held at the Central Election Commission in Gwacheon on the 2nd, responding to questions from the press.
[Image source=Yonhap News]

In the press release distributed in advance, Lee pointed out, "According to the Central Election Commission's special audit committee announcement, Secretary-General Park Chan-jin, Deputy Secretary-General Song Bong-seop, Jeju Standing Commissioner Shin Woo-yong, and Gyeongnam General Affairs Manager Kim Jeong-gyu are suspected of exerting undue influence in the hiring process of their children, and a request for investigation was made. According to materials submitted by People's Power lawmakers Lee Man-hee and Jeon Bong-min from the Election Commission, it was revealed that the children of four retired executives were preferentially hired at their 'father's workplace,' and it was also revealed that a younger brother was hired based on career at the Election Commission."

He added, "The matter is very serious and has caused public outrage. On the 31st of last month, the Board of Audit and Inspection decided to conduct a thorough inspection of the legality and preferential treatment in personnel management, including hiring and promotion, targeting the Election Commission. However, the accused No Tae-ak and other commissioners of the Election Commission refused the Board of Audit and Inspection's audit, stating that 'the Election Commission has not been subject to internal audits due to the checks and balances among state institutions, which is a constitutional custom. Therefore, it was the unanimous opinion of the commissioners that it is difficult to comply with the internal audit.'"

Lee said, "The Election Commission claims that it has not been subject to internal audits due to checks and balances among state institutions, which is a constitutional custom, but customs are merely repetitive acts that can be broken at any time, so refusal of the audit cannot be a legal basis," adding, "The Election Commission also claims that Article 97 of the Constitution excludes the Election Commission from the scope of the Board of Audit and Inspection's audit, but Article 97 of the Constitution stipulates that audits can be conducted on the duties of public officials, and the scope of public officials subject to audit is defined in Article 24 of the Board of Audit and Inspection Act, which includes administrative agencies except for the National Assembly, courts, and the Constitutional Court, and the duties of public officials belonging to them."

He stated, "Since the Election Commission's election management duties fall under administrative affairs, it can be substantially regarded as an administrative agency and thus subject to the Board of Audit and Inspection's audit," adding, "The Board of Audit and Inspection has audited the Election Commission in 2016 and 2019."

Lee emphasized, "The Election Commission argues that the Board of Audit and Inspection's audit could infringe on its independence and neutrality, but an audit regarding hiring irregularities does not affect the Election Commission's independence and neutrality in any way."

Finally, Lee appealed, "Refusing the audit on hiring irregularities clearly violates Article 51 of the Board of Audit and Inspection Act, which punishes those who refuse audits. Therefore, I will criminally report Chairman No Tae-ak and all commissioners who decided to refuse the audit for violating the Board of Audit and Inspection Act," and urged, "Given the gravity of the matter, I ask the investigative authorities to conduct a thorough investigation and severely punish the accused."

Article 51 (Penalties) Paragraph 1 of the Board of Audit and Inspection Act stipulates that those subject to audits under the Act who refuse the audit or fail to comply with requests for submission of materials shall be punished by imprisonment for up to one year or a fine of up to 10 million won.

Seongbae Lee, Seoul City Council member.
Photo by Seongbae Lee

Earlier, on the 2nd, the Election Commission held a committee meeting and decided to accept a National Assembly investigation or an audit by the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission regarding the preferential hiring allegations but decided not to accept the Board of Audit and Inspection's internal audit.

In political and legal circles, there were criticisms that the Election Commission's acceptance of only the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission's audit, which lacks practical compulsory investigation authority, while refusing the Board of Audit and Inspection's audit, was a trick.

The Election Commission maintains the position that it is not subject to the Board of Audit and Inspection's internal audit under the Constitution.

Article 97 of the Constitution states, "To conduct audits of the state's revenue and expenditure settlements, audits of the accounts of the state and organizations prescribed by law, and internal audits of administrative agencies and public officials, the Board of Audit and Inspection shall be established under the President."

The Election Commission argues that since it is a constitutional agency separately stipulated in Chapter 7 of the Constitution and not a statutory agency, it is not subject to the Board of Audit and Inspection's audit. They claim that the Election Commission cannot be included among administrative agencies subject to the Board of Audit and Inspection's audit.

However, there is a counterargument that the Election Commission's claim lacks persuasiveness because the current audit concerns internal audits related to employee misconduct, i.e., duties, rather than accounting audits.

Meanwhile, the two agencies also show significant differences in their positions regarding Article 24 of the Board of Audit and Inspection Act, which stipulates the scope of internal audits.

Article 24 (Scope of Internal Audits) Paragraph 1 of the Board of Audit and Inspection Act lists the audit targets as ▲ the affairs of administrative agencies established under the Government Organization Act and other laws and the duties of public officials belonging to them (Item 1) ▲ the affairs of local governments and the duties of local public officials belonging to them (Item 2) ▲ the affairs of persons specified in Article 22 Paragraph 1 Item 3 and Article 23 Item 7 and the duties of officers and employees related directly or indirectly to accounting affairs subject to the Board of Audit and Inspection's audit (Item 3) ▲ affairs entrusted or delegated by the state or local governments under laws and the duties of public officials or persons equivalent to public officials under other laws (Item 4).

Paragraph 3 of the same article specifies exceptions to the audit targets, stating that "public officials under Paragraph 1 exclude those belonging to the National Assembly, courts, and the Constitutional Court."

The Board of Audit and Inspection holds the position that since the institutions excluded from internal audits under the Act are only the National Assembly, courts, and the Constitutional Court, the Election Commission is naturally included in the audit targets. The fact that the 1994 amendment to the Board of Audit and Inspection Act decided not to exclude the Election Commission during discussions in the National Assembly supports this claim.

In response, the Election Commission claims this is a "legislative deficiency."

The two agencies also clashed over whether to accept internal audits during the controversy over the "Sokuri voting" incident in the early voting process of last year's presidential election.

Meanwhile, Lee is currently running in the People's Power party's by-election for the Supreme Council member and has advanced to the main primary.

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