Democrats, silence is gold? Another reason for Kim Hak’s withdrawal controversy

On the 13th, Vice Minister of Justice Lee Yong-gu said, “In relation to the case of former Vice Minister Kim Hak, which was the pending issue at the time, as public concerns about his departure from the country grew, it was only a recommendation from the Prosecutor’s Office of the Ministry of Justice that the need to promptly prevent departure and re-investigation.” I informed the reporters. Reporter Oh Jong-taek

In addition, on the 13th, the Democratic Party leadership was controversial over the violation of the ban on departure from former Vice Minister of Justice Kim Hak-eui. None of the leadership, including Nak-Yeon Lee and Tae-nyeon Kim, made a stance on this issue in the Supreme Council on this day. It is an atmosphere that avoids party-level responses.

Former Vice Minister of Justice Kim Hak-eui, Vice Minister of Justice Yong-gu Lee, Chief of the Criminal Division of the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office Lee Jong-geun, and Chief of the Central District Prosecutors’ Office Lee Seong-yoon, who were pointed out for the allegations of forgery of documents banned from leaving the country, are representative close friends of the Ministry of Justice and the prosecution. Last year, in the face of the conflict between Chu Miae and Yoon Seok-yeol, the Democratic Party has been evaluated as “the reform leader within the prosecution” (re-election of the Judiciary Committee). Also referred to as “Chumiae Line,” they were the head of the Justice Department (Lee Yong-gu), the Minister of Justice’s policy adviser (Lee Jong-geun), and the chief prosecutor’s anti-corruption chief (Lee Seong-yoon) in March 2019 during the days of the Minister of Justice Park Sang-sang, who had a ban on departure.

On that day, Vice Minister Lee sent a text message to reporters claiming, “I did not know well about the specific procedures such as the department in charge of the investigative agency requesting the actual departure ban or the case number assignment, and could not be involved.” However, the Democratic Party members of the National Assembly Legislative Judicial Committee, who have been in sync with them, Responses such as “I don’t know exactly the facts” and “What the Ministry of Justice should do on its own” were responded. The atmosphere is that “no one cares” (aide from the judiciary committee) about Lee’s explanation.

A request for an emergency ban on entry to former Vice Minister of Justice Kim Hak-eui and a request for approval by the Minister of Justice, prepared by aunt prosecutor of the Supreme Prosecutor’s Office’s Past Photographic Investigation Group on March 22, 2019 and the following day, March 23. The prosecutor wrote the case number of the 2013 Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Office, where former Vice Minister Kim was not accused, and the case number of the Seoul East District District Prosecutor’s Office 2019, which does not exist in the request for approval.[중앙일보]

A member of the Democratic Party’s Judiciary Committee said on the day, “The two sides argue differently about the case number written on the banning documents. You have to find out the facts first,” he said. “We should check the recent practices of the investigation site, and if there is a problem, the Ministry of Justice should investigate and take responsibility for the person who gave the order or approval.” It is said that the Democratic Judiciary Committee has never discussed this issue. Another judiciary “Even if the papers were fabricated, it wasn’t the Democratic Party. There is no need to intervene in unnecessary politics.”Made an opinion.

Among the judiciary committee members, Kim Yong-min was one of the Democratic Party members who actively countered. Rep. Kim pulled out a frame for reform of the prosecution, saying, “Unless the prosecution’s right to investigate is completely recovered, these things will continue to repeat.” On that day, he posted on his Facebook page, “When Kim Hak-ui was arrested after the rediscovery of the case of Kim Hak-ui, which the prosecutors saw openly, it seems that the prosecution’s resentment turned to the people who investigated it. The prosecution’s investigation into the history of the prosecution would have been the first to be considered a shame from the prosecution’s point of view,” he said. “It is because people who became thorns in their eyes from the prosecution’s point of view revealed the reality of Kim Hak’s case and exposed the prosecution’s denial.”

Rep. Kim is one of the parties to the alleged forgery of documents prohibiting departure. Rep. Kim, who served as a lawyer and a member of the Kim Hak’s case of the Prosecutors’ Past History Committee under the Ministry of Justice, held a press conference at the time. “There is a need for a ban on leaving the country by contacting Lee Yong-gu, the secretary of the past son-in-law.And said that.

Kim Yong-min, a member of the Prosecutors’ Past History Committee, held a press conference at the Seoul Bar Association in Seocho-dong, Seoul on April 8, 2019, and explained about Kim Hak’s request for a ban on departure from the former vice minister and the great prosecutor’s opposition. Reporter Oh Jong-taek

The Democratic Party’s reaction to this is also the perception that the development of the case itself is not bad for the passport. The first lawmaker in the metropolitan area said, “It is certain that former Vice Minister Kim was prostitution, and that is the essence. Why is the controversy going aside? It was more essential to not investigate Kim Hak-ui properly and not punish him.”

A top commissioner also said in the call, “Is there any reason to wrap up with such a person?” “Procedural legitimacy is important, but the demand for a special prosecution of the people’s power sounds like a word to defend sex offenders.” “The opposition party is questioning procedural legitimacy, but the people will have no choice but to see it as a party that defends sex offenders,” said a key member of the passport who wanted anonymity. “There is nothing unfavorable.”

Reporters Saerom Sim and Suhyun Nam [email protected]