Editorials
Why is the DP blocking witnesses for the justice minister nominee's hearing?
The ruling party faces calls to accept key witnesses for justice minister nominee Kim Seung-won's confirmation hearing.
Justice Minister nominee Kim Seung-won arrives at his confirmation hearing preparation office at the Jeokseon Hyundai Building in Jongno District, central Seoul, on Sept. 9.
NEWS1
Negotiations between the ruling and opposition parties over witnesses for the confirmation hearing of Justice Minister nominee Kim Seung-won next Tuesday collapsed on Wednesday. The opposition People Power Party (PPP) requested 48 witnesses and other individuals to testify about allegations surrounding Kim; the ruling Democratic Party (DP) then reportedly insisted that it would "not accept a single witness.”
A confirmation hearing is intended to determine whether a nominee has the qualifications and integrity required for office — all before the public. Allegations involving a justice minister, who bears particular responsibility for upholding the rule of law, demand especially rigorous scrutiny.
The allegations include claims that he solicited approval for a clinical trial of a new drug; questions about why prosecutors changed their position, from recommending his indictment to suspending his prosecution; and speculation that he was involved with a stock manipulation group.
Questions also surround an educational facility operated by Kim’s spouse. Shortly after Kim moved to Suwon, his constituency, the region was designated a provider of activity support services for people with developmental disabilities, after which its revenue from government vouchers surged.
The DP’s defense is unconvincing. It argues that the alleged solicitation for a clinical trial approval ultimately failed and that the opposition is exaggerating the issue. If so, the obvious solution is to summon relevant witnesses and establish the facts. Is the party blocking them because it fears what a thorough examination could uncover?
The DP also claims that confirmation hearings are normally conducted without witnesses. That argument is equally difficult to accept. At Han Dong-hoon’s confirmation hearing for justice minister in 2022, the DP itself demanded testimony from Han Dong-soo, then head of the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office’s inspection department, and Lim Eun-jung, then an inspection officer at the Ministry of Justice.
Some within the ruling party reportedly believe that Kim may have to withdraw from the nomination. The Blue House, however, says that the nominee must undergo the “vetting process prescribed by law.”
If the administration genuinely wants scrutiny under the law, blocking witnesses needed to establish the facts makes little sense. Such obstruction can only raise suspicions that the ruling camp wants either an empty hearing or a breakdown of the process, followed by Kim’s appointment.
If the PPP’s demand for 48 witnesses and other individuals is excessive, the parties can narrow the list to essential figures.
The public deserves to know whether the numerous allegations are true and, if so, whether they are serious enough to disqualify Kim from serving as justice minister.
The DP must cooperate in selecting witnesses and help establish the facts rather than prevent meaningful scrutiny of a nominee entrusted with overseeing Korea’s justice system.
This article was originally written in Korean and translated by a bilingual reporter with the help of generative AI tools. It was then edited by a native English-speaking editor. All AI-assisted translations are reviewed and refined by our newsroom.
