– The suspicions regarding Cha Seung-pyeong must be revealed… but there are differences in methodology.
– Investigate during the establishment of the Public Prosecutor’s Office? What’s the point of having the Public Prosecutor’s Office then?
– Democratic Party, using a special prosecutor for political attacks just like ‘reporting on abandonment’
– A re-vote in the 22nd National Assembly? The opposition does as they please… is this what the National Assembly has become?
– The opposition party using impeachment frivolously, the people will need to reconsider.
– A seminar linking pensions and low birth rates getting attention even from teenagers.
– Considering running for the party convention? I will think about it after the timing is decided.
– Kim Geon-hee resuming public activities? It began with a Yun apology.
– Instead, it is necessary to reveal trivial matters during Kim Jung-sook’s visit to India.
– Broadcast: SBS Kim Tae-hyun’s Political Show (FM 103.5 MHz 7:00 ~ 9:00)
– Date: May 22, 2024 (Wednesday)
– Host: Kim Tae-hyun Lawyer
– Guest: Na Kyung-won, Future National Assembly Member for the People Power Party
Kim Tae-hyun: Yun Seok-yeol, the President, exercised the right to request the re-deliberation of Cha Sang-pyeong’s special prosecutor bill yesterday. It’s being mentioned as the tenth exercise of refusal since taking office. The President’s office stated that they exercised the right to reject because the bill is not in line with the spirit of the constitution and destroys the separation of powers. The ruling party is in the midst of internal consultations. Let’s talk to Na Kyung-won, the future National Assembly member for the People Power Party in Seoul Dongjak. We are connected over the phone. Hello, candidate.
Na Kyung-won: Hello.
Kim Tae-hyun: How do you view the President’s decision to exercise the right to reject the Cha Sang-pyeong special prosecutor bill?
Na Kyung-won: The President has previously mentioned that he would request a special prosecutor if the investigation by the Public Prosecutor’s Office is deemed inadequate. I don’t see my position as different from that. In fact, even before being a politician, as a citizen, I believe that the various suspicions related to the Cha Sang-pyeong case need to be investigated and clarified as soon as possible. In that regard, I don’t think there is a difference in the views between the Democratic Party and our People Power Party. However, I believe there is a difference in the methodology of how to clarify it.
Kim Tae-hyun: I see.
Na Kyung-won: In fact, it was the opposition party that brought the case to the Public Prosecutor’s Office. As you know, the opposition party pushed for the establishment of the Public Prosecutor’s Office by emphasizing that only investigations by the Public Prosecutor’s Office are truly reliable. The Public Prosecutor’s Office is established by a bipartisan agreement, and…
Kim Tae-hyun: Yes.
Na Kyung-won: So the truth is, it was the opposition party that brought the case to the Public Prosecutor’s Office, and to suggest a special prosecutor even before the Public Prosecutor’s Office investigation is completed seems to be an excessive political attack. Throughout the history of the National Assembly, all 13 special prosecutors were dealt with through bipartisan agreements. However, the Democratic Party seems to be unilaterally using the special prosecutor as if it were a tool for political attack.
Kim Tae-hyun: Your explanation suggests that the President’s exercise of the right to reject the bill at this time was appropriate after all.
Na Kyung-won: To put it simply, I think it is the right time to keep an eye on the Public Prosecutor’s Office investigation.
Kim Tae-hyun: So, if the Public Prosecutor’s Office investigation is deemed inadequate, you would support pushing for a special prosecutor, as stated by the President during the previous press conference…
Na Kyung-won: If the Public Prosecutor’s Office investigation is found to be inadequate, our party will push for a special prosecutor.
Kim Tae-hyun: Candidate, what I’m curious about is, at what point will the Public Prosecutor’s Office make their findings public? How will they judge whether the investigation is inadequate or not? It seems like there may not be consensus between the ruling party and the opposition on whether it is inadequate or not.
Na Kyung-won: We are familiar with the investigative process. Why did the opposition party establish the Public Prosecutor’s Office? Why did they bring the case to the Public Prosecutor’s Office? We initially opposed the Public Prosecutor’s Office; we believed that a standing special prosecutor would be more desirable. However, the opposition party insisted that the Public Prosecutor’s Office would be fair and pushed for its establishment through legislative action. Do you remember 2020? At that time, the opposition party fought for the establishment of the Public Prosecutor’s Office, claiming that only investigations by the Public Prosecutor’s Office were truly reliable. Eventually, the Public Prosecutor’s Office was passed through the opposition party’s forceful handling. They said, “Let’s create the Public Prosecutor’s Office,” brought the case to the Public Prosecutor’s Office, and even before the investigation was completed, suggested a special prosecutor. Now, in fact, the opposition party is talking about around six instances for the 22nd National Assembly. They are suggesting special prosecutors for Lee Jae-myung, and even though the Cho Guk case has reached the second trial, they are proposing a special prosecutor. In short, the opposition’s intention seems to focus more on political attacks rather than revealing the truth. Therefore, as a citizen, I sincerely hope that this is clarified as soon as possible. However, persistently leading the country into a special prosecutor situation seems to be a result of the opposition’s ongoing political attacks.
Kim Tae-hyun: Candidate, how do you perceive the political objectives that the opposition seeks to achieve through the Cha Sang-pyeong special prosecutor bill?
Na Kyung-won: Continually demonstrating to the public that this government has done something wrong is one of their main objectives. In fact, regarding the Cha Sang-pyeong incident… we shouldn’t call it the Cha Sang-pyeong incident.
Kim Tae-hyun: Cha Haebyeong (Navy officers), right?
Na Kyung-won: No, it should be referred to as the Navy Personnel Incident.
Kim Tae-hyun: Understandable.
Na Kyung-won: By continuously opposing this issue, it appears that the government is continually being exposed for doing wrong.
Kim Tae-hyun: Then, as the investigation by the Public Prosecutor’s Office progresses, you consider revealing what is most important through the investigation?
Na Kyung-won: Ultimately, it’s about whether there was external pressure or not, right?
Kim Tae-hyun: This is what people call the VIP Wrathgate, right? That’s how it’s portrayed in the media.
Na Kyung-won: Exactly, starting from there and seeing how things unfold.
Kim Tae-hyun: However, candidate, as I mentioned earlier, if the investigation results are inadequate, the President has also stated that he will push for a special prosecutor.
Na Kyung-won: If the investigation results from the Public Prosecutor’s Office are insufficient, our party will proceed with a special prosecutor.
Kim Tae-hyun: Candidate, what I’m wondering is, should the Public Prosecutor’s Office announce the results at some point? How will it be determined whether the results are adequate or not? It seems like there may not be a consensus between the ruling party and the opposition on whether it is inadequate.
Na Kyung-won: We should understand the investigative process thus far. However, why did the opposition party establish the Public Prosecutor’s Office? Why did they report to the Public Prosecutor’s Office? Even though we had opposed the Public Prosecutor’s Office in the past, stating that a standing special prosecutor would be more desirable, we established the Public Prosecutor’s Office because the opposition party insisted that only investigations by the Public Prosecutor’s Office were truly reliable. The appointment of the Public Prosecutor’s Office Chief is made through bipartisan agreement.
Kim Tae-hyun: I see.
Na Kyung-won: Therefore, in reality, the opposition party reported to the Public Prosecutor’s Office, and even before the investigation by the Public Prosecutor’s Office was completed, they suggested a special prosecutor. This seems to be an excessive political attack. Historically, all 13 special prosecutors were agreed upon by both ruling and opposition parties. However, it appears that the Democratic Party is unilaterally pushing for a special prosecutor, using it as a tool for political attack.
Kim Tae-hyun: Your explanation suggests that the rejection of the bill by the President was appropriate at this time.
Na Kyung-won: It’s more about the right timing to monitor the investigation by the Public Prosecutor’s Office.
Kim Tae-hyun: If the investigation by the Public Prosecutor’s Office is found to be insufficient, our party will proceed with a special prosecutor.
Na Kyung-won: Candidate, you have now repeated the same question multiple times, and if the investigation results are inadequate, both the ruling party and our party will push for a special prosecutor.
Kim Tae-hyun: The reason I’m asking is that if and when the results of the investigation by the Public Prosecutor’s Office are announced, how will it be determined whether the results are adequate or not? It seems like there may not be agreement between the ruling party and the opposition on whether it is inadequate.
Na Kyung-won: We understand the investigation process thus far. However, why did the opposition party establish the Public Prosecutor’s Office? Why did they report to the Public Prosecutor’s Office? Even though we had opposed the Public Prosecutor’s Office in the past, stating that a standing special prosecutor would be more desirable, we established the Public Prosecutor’s Office because the opposition party insisted that only investigations by the Public Prosecutor’s Office were truly reliable. The appointment of the Public Prosecutor’s Office Chief is made through bipartisan agreement.
Kim Tae-hyun: I see.
Na Kyung-won: Therefore, in reality, the opposition party reported to the Public Prosecutor’s Office, and even before the investigation by the Public Prosecutor’s Office was completed, they suggested a special prosecutor. This seems to be an excessive political attack. Historically, all special prosecutors were agreed upon by both ruling and opposition parties. However, it appears that the Democratic Party is unilaterally pushing for a special prosecutor, using it as a tool for political attack.
Kim Tae-hyun: Your explanation suggests that the President’s exercise…
Na Kyung-won: Candidate, why did the opposition party establish the Public Prosecutor’s Office? Why did they report to the Public Prosecutor’s Office? Even though we had opposed the establishment of the Public Prosecutor’s Office in the past, we established it because the opposition party deemed it reliable. The appointment of…
Kim Tae-hyun: Right.
Na Kyung-won: The opposition party reported to the Public Prosecutor’s Office, even before the investigation by the Public Prosecutor’s Office was completed, they proposed a special prosecutor. It appears to be a heavy political attack. Throughout history, all special prosecutors were agreed upon by both…