It turns out that the Democratic Party representative Lee Nak-yeon, who announced that he would propose amnesty to President Moon Jae-in, for two former presidents, Lee Myung-bak and Park Geun-hye, previously proposed a law restricting the president’s right to amnesty. Representative Lee stipulated a crime in which pardon was impossible in the law, as well as the crimes of two former presidents. The amnesty card thrown at the beginning of the new year is placed in front of the purpose of his past bill.
In February 2005, when it became known that President Roh Moo-hyun had reviewed chaebol presidents and politicians as targets for the 3/1 special pardon, then Rep. Nak-yeon Lee showed a negative position on the pardon. In the end, former President Roh included his aide and supporter Kang Geum-won, former CEO of Changshin Textile, on the list of special envoys, and in the political world, he fought over the presidential pardon.
In May of the same year, Democratic Party leader Lee Nak-yeon told OhmyNews, “I agree with the purpose of restricting the right to amnesty, such as by preparing a device to curb the abuse of the right to amnesty.” We will come up with a new alternative.”
On June 13, the following month, he representatively proposed the’Amendment of the Law for Partial Amnesty’. The bill was also signed by Joo Ho-young, the current National Strength.
According to the bill, the president placed restrictions on the presidential decision by requiring the president of the Supreme Court to seek the opinion of the Supreme Court when deciding on pardon.
In addition, the revised bill has included the exclusion of amnesty for those who have not passed one year after receiving the final judgment or who have not fulfilled a third of the sentence. According to this criterion, the two former presidents Lee’s assertion (Lee Myung-bak sentenced on October 29 last year and Park Geun-hye coming on the 14th) are excluded from pardon.
The amendment stipulated the types of crimes for which special pardons are not possible. These include Article 2 of the Constitutional Order Destruction Crimes, Political Funds Act, and the Act on the Greater Punishment for Specific Crimes, and Articles 3 and 5 of the Act on the Greater Punishment for Specific Economic Crimes. The Special Price Act is a provision related to bribery, and the Special Offer Act is a regulation related to aggravated punishment such as fraud and embezzlement.
Since both former presidents were punished for bribery, Lee is also not subject to pardon according to the law initiated by Lee.
Regarding the reason for the proposed amendment, Lee said, “The presidential amnesty is the president’s own right guaranteed by the Constitution, but since it has the effect of changing the judgment of the judiciary, it must be exercised appropriately and fairly, and if abused, there is a concern that legal stability will be greatly damaged.” He argued that “the political and political level of abuse and misuse results in the people distrusting the national judicial law, so the scope of the presidential amnesty and the procedures for exercising them are defined so that the exercise of the amnesty rights is carefully exercised.”
On the other hand, in an interview with the Hankook Ilbo on the 3rd, CEO Lee insisted on pardoning for political reasons, saying, “To overcome the national crisis, we must unite the power of the divided people into one.” “To do so, politics must be restored and become active again.”
Copyright © Media Today, unauthorized reproduction and redistribution are prohibited.