Botched Kim Seung-won hearing makes his appointment even riskier

The confirmation hearing for Justice Minister nominee Kim Seung-won, the biggest potential flashpoint in President Lee Jae Myung’s second Cabinet reshuffle, ended Tuesday. The People Power Party launched a barrage of attacks over the nominee, who has faced a litany of allegations, while the Democratic Party (DP) mounted an all-out defense.

The DP appeared intent on turning the hearing into a dysfunctional, substance-free exercise, undermining what should be a forum for public scrutiny. From the outset, DP lawmakers disrupted proceedings with insults directed at opposition committee members, including “hideous face” and “devil.” When discussing volunteer work by Kim’s wife and son at a care facility for people with developmental disabilities, they then tried to portray the family as deserving praise.

Shielded by the DP, Kim’s answers did little to dispel suspicions and sometimes produced almost farcical scenes. Asked about allegations that he improperly sought approval for a clinical trial of a new drug, Kim made the bizarre argument that because prosecutors had suspended his indictment, discussing the allegations could constitute unlawful disclosure of suspected criminal conduct.

Asked whether he knew that animal testing by the pharmaceutical company had been manipulated, he replied, “I studied humanities, so I couldn’t have known.”

If Kim lacked the expertise, why did he personally contact the head of the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety about the matter?

Kim also appeared close to tears while explaining allegations of preferential treatment involving his wife and son at the care facility. Some DP lawmakers applauded afterward. The day before the hearing, the party reportedly distributed an anticipated Q&A to its committee members to coordinate their defense. Were the tears and applause also part of the script?

The hollow hearing was predictable once Kim failed to submit 64.6 percent of requested materials and the DP ensured that not a single witness or reference witness would appear.

The ruling camp, having reduced the hearing to something resembling a black comedy, now appears increasingly likely to push ahead with Kim’s appointment.

Yet even before the hearing, widespread doubts about Kim’s fitness to serve as justice minister had emerged over numerous allegations, ethical controversies and his record of drunk driving. The hearing only reinforced those concerns.

Installing Kim as minister responsible for law, principle, fairness and justice despite all this would have predictable consequences. With the president’s approval rating repeatedly hitting new lows, forcing through another appointment against public sentiment could provoke even greater backlash.

It would also deepen suspicions about why the administration is so determined to keep Kim despite its declining political momentum — including questions over whether his appointment is intended to facilitate the withdrawal of charges in cases involving the president.