Policy Officer Receives Supplementary Budget Report Instead of Council Member... Audit Vacancy Persists for a Month
by Song Bohyeon
Published 24 Sep.2025 15:45(KST)
Updated 24 Sep.2025 16:14(KST)
Different Interpretations from Bukgu District Audit Office, Council, and Ministry of the Interior and Safety
Calls for Urgent Improvement of Audit Authority from Within and On the Ground
Concerns Raised Over Undermining the Purpose of the Policy
It has been a month since the incident in which a policy officer at the Gwangju Bukgu Council received a supplementary budget report on behalf of a council member, but the repercussions continue. Although it initially seemed to be resolved with an official apology, the controversy has only grown as differing opinions have emerged between the district office audit office, the council, and the Ministry of the Interior and Safety regarding who should hold audit authority.
According to an Asia Economy report on the 24th, on August 25, a policy officer at the Bukgu Council received a supplementary budget report from executive branch officials on behalf of a council member. Several officials who attended the meeting told the press, “The policy officer essentially received the report as if they were a council member, even though no council member was present.”
One senior official said, “I was surprised when the policy officer sat in the council member’s seat and greeted us,” adding, “The explanation itself was hard to accept.” Another senior official pointed out, “They said they would only receive the documents, but in the end, they requested an explanation as well.” The Bukgu Office branch of the government employees’ union demanded a public apology, stating, “It is not in line with the purpose of the system for support staff to directly receive reports.”
The policy officer immediately posted an apology on the internal bulletin board, stating, “I only intended to collect the documents, but by listening to the explanation, I caused misunderstanding. It was my mistake.” However, some officials claimed, “The policy officer requested the report, saying it was under the council member’s instructions,” resulting in conflicting statements.
Subsequently, on the 3rd, the Bukgu Council, acknowledging the limitations of its own investigation, requested an audit of the matter by the district office’s audit department. In a reply on the 9th, the audit department stated, “The authority for personnel and disciplinary action regarding council staff lies with the council chairperson.”
An audit office official explained, “Due to the 2022 revision of the Local Autonomy Act, the authority to appoint and discipline council staff now belongs to the council chairperson, and we have notified the council of this. While the council does not have an official internal audit body in the legal sense, it can have an internal function to monitor operations.” The official further explained that under the Act on Public Audit, the Board of Audit and Inspection’s position is that “the organization should make its own judgment.”
As differing opinions emerged regarding audit authority, on the 18th, the Bukgu Council requested an authoritative interpretation from the Ministry of the Interior and Safety. In a response the previous day, the ministry stated, “While the authority to discipline council staff belongs to the council chairperson, since there is no legal basis for establishing an audit body within the council, it is appropriate for the district office audit office to conduct investigations and audits.” The ministry also specified, “If the district office audit office notifies the council of the investigation results, the council chairperson should make the final decision based on the opinion of the local council disciplinary committee.”
Some point out that this controversy reveals not just a simple mishap, but the systemic limitations as a whole. An anonymous district office official said, “There are different interpretations and positions regarding audit authority. Even if it’s not just about this case, it is clear that there is a need for institutional improvement.”
An official from another local council in the area commented, “Rather than being operated as intended, the policy officer system is starting with competition to build relationships with council members. As a result, work competency and expertise are being pushed aside, leading to a negative trend of leveling down.”
Choi Moosong, chairperson of the Bukgu Council, stated regarding this matter, “We are making efforts at the council level to process the necessary procedures.” He added, “However, the executive branch is expressing reluctance, citing the Act on Public Audit and other reasons. I immediately delivered the Ministry of the Interior and Safety’s response to the executive branch yesterday, and we will work to ensure there is no misunderstanding that the audit or investigation is being delayed.”
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.