Go to contents

Independent council should prove Park’s claim of innocence is groundless

Independent council should prove Park’s claim of innocence is groundless

Posted November. 30, 2016 07:18,   

Updated November. 30, 2016 07:24

한국어

The three main opposition parties namely the Minjoo Party, the People’s Party, and the Justice Party on Tuesday recommended Cho Seung-shik, former head of the criminal department at the Supreme Public Prosecutors’ Office, and Park Yeong-soo, former chief of the Seoul High Prosecutors’ Office, as candidates for an independent counsel who will investigate the manipulation of state affairs by President Park Geun-hye’s confidante Choi Soon-sil. It is uncertain whom Park will pick of the two, but there will not be much difference between the candidates in that they have been picked by the opposition parties.

“The problems that have currently emerged are matters that I pushed for in the belief that they are public projects beneficial to the nation, and I haven't had any personal gain in the process,” President Park said on Tuesday. “However, I made a huge mistake by failing to control people around me.” The embattled president in effect flatly denied prosecutorial investigation that booked her as a suspect on the charges of abuse of power. If an independent council is to break the president’s logic of defense, it should secure evidence or "smoking gun" that clearly verifies her acts of crime, and force people embroiled in the scandal including Choi Soon-sil to break silence and tell the truth.

 

The independent council will have a team of four deputy counsels, 20 prosecutors seconded from the prosecution, and 40 special investigators, and investigate the case for up to 120 days to find the truth, but the situation is hardly a favorable one. Prosecutors had limitations in their capacities to get to the bottom of the scandal, as they had to probe wide-ranging suspicions belatedly amid the fast approaching deadline for suspects’ indictment (Nov. 20), after initially wasting time because they were wary of those in power. Notably, it is the independent counsel’s responsibility to clarify whether former presidential chief of staff Kim Ki-choon and former senior presidential secretary for civil affairs Woo Byung-woo, whom the prosecution has failed to question, were negligent about or allowed manipulation of state affairs by Choi to happen. The same holds true with suspicions over the president’s controversial "seven hours" on the day of the Sewol ferry’s sinking. The independent counsel’s investigation entails grave responsibility since it will serve as an important yardstick in the Constitutional Court’s review of the constitutionality of Park’s impeachment. The independent council should set a good example in order to ensure the public’s right to know in accordance with provisions under related laws as well.

In her public statement on Tuesday, President Park said, “I will tell you how this case happened in details in the near future,” implying that she will give a separate press conference. Her statement that she will clarify issues before the media regarding questions to be investigated by the independent counsel should not be the expression‎ of her intent to reject questioning by the independent counsel. President Park, who has avoided the prosecutorial probe in defiance of her own earlier promise, should not be using her constitutional status that exempts her from criminal indictment during her term in office, and should sincerely accept the independent council probe, and take responsibility corresponding to the outcome of the investigation.



eligius@donga.com