▲ (From left) Yoon Mi-hyang - Lee Sang-jik - Park Deok-heum


There are three members of the National Assembly who are on the verge of being expelled from their parliamentary posts for the first time in 43 years.

Independent Rep. Yoon Mi-hyang, Lee Sang-jik, and People's Power Rep. Park Deok-heum who left the Democratic Party.

Rep. Yoon Mi-hyang is being tried on charges of embezzlement of donations from comfort women victims, which surfaced last year, while Rep. Lee Sang-jik is serving a six-year prison sentence in the first trial on charges of breach of trust and embezzlement related to Eastar Jet.

Rep. Park Deok-heum has been accused of conflicts of interest with the controversy that a construction company named in his family received preferential orders from the audited organization.

Expulsion means you will soon lose your parliamentary seat.

With the exception of the invalidation of the election in court, Kim Young-sam, then president of the New Democratic Party in 1979, remains the only case in which he lost his parliamentary seat due to 'expulsion'.




Among them, the news that Rep. Yoon Mi-hyang is actively participating in the 'self-rescue movement' was reported exclusively on SBS 8 News on the 9th.

On the 25th of last month, when the National Assembly's Ethics Committee submitted the proposal of expulsion of Rep. Mi-hyang Yoon, Sang-jik Lee, and Deok-heum Park to the plenary session, until recently, Rep. Yoon visited or phoned former fellow Democratic lawmakers in person, and if that didn't work, about 4,000 It was confirmed that a long text message was sent.

According to a text message we obtained, Rep. Yoon explained the allegations raised against him one by one, saying, "It was painful not to harm the party, but I have been silent without publicly speaking my voice."

She also called for her expulsion to be a "serious human rights violation", even though she has not been convicted of a crime, and she asked her to help with the withdrawal.



▶ [Exclusive] Yoon Mi-hyang, self-saving exercise…

Special Ethics Committee 'Chilpeil'




Rep. Yoon Mi-hyang is not the only one struggling.

Many women and civic groups, such as the Justice and Remembrance Coalition (Jeong Eui-yeon) and the National Women's Solidarity, also started a campaign to save Rep. Yoon, demanding the withdrawal of the expulsion plan.

The large-scale rescue campaign seems to have been influenced by the press conference of the Democratic Party leader Song Young-gil on the 27th of last month.

Representative Song said, "It is not a day or two for our National Assembly to be moderately crushed and act as if it had never happened after a while despite the faults of lawmakers," he said.

Rep. Yoon was seen as literally on the verge of pardon as even the leader of the party, which he was once a member of the largest party, turned his back on him.




However, it seems that an unexpected (?) savior will appear to Rep. Yoon Mi-hyang.

She is a member of the People's Power, Rep. Park Deok-heum, who was also recommended to be expelled together.

It's not because Rep. Park Deok-heum wants it.

There is a high possibility that he will also unexpectedly become Rep. Yoon's 'saviour'.

How can Rep. Park, who is in a different party and even in the same situation, become Rep. Yoon's savior? Many of you may think that it is nonsense.

It's not difficult.

Just listen to the explanation and you will understand immediately.

Yoon Mi-hyang in crisis, Park Deok-heum as the savior?

In conclusion, at this point, there is a very high possibility that the proposal for expulsion of Rep. Yoon Mi-hyang and others will be rejected this time as well.

This is because the power of the people is delaying the so-called special ethics committee convening.

In order for the bill to be passed as a member of the National Assembly, the National Assembly Ethics Review Advisory Committee, made up of external figures such as professors and lawyers, must first review the bill.

After that, when the advisory committee recommends expulsion, it is presented to the general meeting of the special committee on ethics in the National Assembly, then goes through a general meeting with the second lieutenant and then goes up to the general meeting of the National Assembly where all members of the National Assembly participate in voting.

At the plenary session, if two-thirds of the total members approve (more than 197 seats based on the current 295 seats), the expulsion will be completed.

In a nutshell:

1) National Assembly Ethics Review Advisory Committee Review + Expulsion Proposal -> 2) National Assembly Ethics Special Committee Plenary Meeting -> 3) National Assembly Ethics Special Committee Sub-Consultation Review ->


4) National Assembly Ethics Special Committee Plenary Meeting + Proposal of Expulsion -> 5) National Assembly Plenary Session process



The advisory committee recommended the expulsion of the three lawmakers on the 5th of last month, and the Democratic Party independently convened a special ethics committee and proposed the expulsion proposal to the plenary meeting.

That is, it has been done twice.

The most important thing is, of course, the voting procedure of the plenary session of the National Assembly, but in fact, if it passes only 3 times, there is no big problem in going up to 5 times.

However, the so-called screening process, which is the third procedure after the second, is not being conducted.



The Democratic Party proposed to the People's Power to convene a special ethics committee on the 10th, ahead of the plenary session tomorrow (14th).

It is because of the judgment that the discussion must start on the 10th at least physically before the plenary session on the 14th.

The most time-consuming of the remaining procedures is the so-called screening process No. 3.

In the second half, lawmakers from the ruling and opposition parties discuss why they recommended expulsion based on the contents reviewed by the Ethics Review Advisory Committee and decide whether or not they should be expelled.

It goes to the plenary meeting only when it is adopted through the so-called meeting, and if it is passed at the plenary meeting, the proposal for expulsion can be submitted to the plenary session.



However, the People's Power is known for its position that it is possible to convene a special committee only on the 14th, when the plenary session is held due to the presidential election campaign.

Han Byung-do, a senior vice floor leader of the Democratic Party of Korea, who is in charge of negotiating the floor of the special ethics committee, told reporters, "In the power of the people, I insisted on holding the event on the 14th because two members of the so-called member of the House of Representatives were in the presidential election campaign, so they had to hold office and it was difficult to coordinate the schedule." and explained.

Even if the Ethics Special Committee opens on the morning of the 14th, considering the time it takes for the so-called review, adoption of the plenary meeting, and the proposal, the processing of the plenary session on the 14th should be considered physically impossible.



The problem is that the plenary session on the 14th is actually the last plenary session of the National Assembly before the election.

The official election campaign for the presidential election begins on the 15th.

Most of the candidates, as well as members of the opposition and parliamentarians, are scattered into their respective constituencies and devoted themselves to the election campaign.

Disposal of the expulsion proposal before the election is like a crossover of water.

So, what about after the election?

After the presidential election, the winning side is busy with the winning side, and the losing side is busy with the losing side, so there is a very high possibility that there will be no discussion about the expulsion proposal.

As it was analyzed that this expulsion proposal was a presidential card in the first place, the National Assembly's special skill of 'heartbreaking' is being demonstrated once again.

The power of the people that cannot be separated, Deok-Heum Park who cannot leave


Then, why did the People's Power postpone the convening of the Special Ethics Committee?

On the surface, the people's position is that "there is no reason to procrastinate", but the truth seems to be different.

The biggest reason is the logic that "Park Deok-heum is different from Yoon Mi-hyang and Lee Sang-jik".

Unlike Rep. Yoon Mi-hyang, who aroused public outrage over all kinds of allegations and is being tried at the end of the investigation (though she is complaining of injustice), or Rep. Lee Sang-jik, who was sentenced to 6 years in prison and sent to prison, Rep. Park Deok-heum took no judicial action. did not receive

A complaint was submitted to the prosecution on charges of breach of trust of 20 billion won, but the investigation has been inactive for one year and five months.

There are criticisms of whether it is 'to be looked after by the prosecution', but it is known that there are many opinions from inside and outside the legal community that the case is likely to end without charges.

In this situation, Assemblyman Park himself asserts that a member of the National Assembly elected by the local residents can be expelled based on suspicion alone, and it has been transmitted as an internal atmosphere of the people's power.



It is an analysis that Rep. Park Deok-heum's 'personal skill' also plays a role.

As of December 31, 2020, Rep. Park's fortune is 55.9,88.55 million won, ranking 2nd among incumbent lawmakers.

Based on his powerful financial resources, the saying 'There is not one or two lawmakers wearing the semblance of Rep. Park, regardless of the opposition,' spreads inside and outside the National Assembly.

In fact, even within the Democratic Party, there are several lawmakers who support Rep. Park Deok-heum.

The various allegations, such as a construction company in the name of a family member winning a contract for a subordinated institution while being on the National Assembly's National Assembly, are inappropriate to the public's eye, but it is argued that there is an unfair part in going to the expulsion of a member of the National Assembly.



Unlike the proportionally first-elected lawmaker Yoon Mi-hyang and re-elected lawmaker Lee Sang-jik, the status of Rep. Park's party within the party cannot be ignored as a full-fledged senior who succeeded in getting a third term.

He even made an in-laws with Rep. Jeong Jin-seok, a senior member of the party and vice-chairman of the National Assembly.

Considering many things, it means that it is not a card that can be easily discarded by the People's Power.

In response to a reporter's question about whether the special ethics committee will be held and whether the plenary session can be handled, Choo Kyung-ho, who is in charge of the opposition party of the Special Ethics Committee, repeated the words, "Ask the Democratic Party of Korea." I did.




It's the Democrats who have the body.

The fact that even the party leader emphasized 'quick processing of the expulsion proposal' was conveyed with the intention of easing the image of 'neighborhood' that had accumulated in the Democratic Party ahead of the presidential election.

As candidate Lee Jae-myung's approval rating continues to stagnate, there is an atmosphere that the Democratic Party will do anything to help with the presidential election.

As public opinion about Rep. Yoon Mi-hyang and Lee Sang-jik is still not good, it is advantageous for the Democratic Party to expel the bill as soon as possible.

Unlike the case of Rep. Park Deok-heum, the internal atmosphere of the Democratic Party toward Rep. Yoon and Rep. Lee is also not good.

A key official of the Democratic Party's leadership told reporters, "The party's position to deal with the expulsion proposal is firm."



However, it is difficult for the Democratic Party to convene a special ethics committee alone to handle the expulsion proposal.

No matter how it goes through the Special Ethics Committee and it is brought to the plenary session, two-thirds of the total number of members, that is, 197 out of the current 295 seats, are needed to process the proposal.

In the Democratic Party's 172 seats, the Justice Party, Transition, Basic Income, and independent lawmakers Kim Hong-geol, Yang Jeong-suk, and Yang Hyang-ja are all 'young' together, and the total is only 183 seats.

Since the Ethics Review and Advisory Committee recommended the expulsion proposals for Rep. Mi-hyang Yoon, Sang-jik Lee, and Deok-heum Park, it is difficult to deal with only the proposals for removal of Representatives Mi-hyang Yoon and Lee Sang-jik separately.

The cooperation of the people's power is essential.



On the other hand, the power of the people is a relaxed atmosphere.

There is a reason explained above, but it is because it is judged that whether or not to handle the expulsion proposal of Rep. Park Deok-heum does not have much effect on the presidential election.

Putting these circumstances together, it is very likely that Rep. Park Deok-heum will rescue Rep. Yoon Mi-hyang as a result.


Since the establishment of the Special Ethics Committee in 1991, '0 cases'...

still bulletproof parliament

As I wrote at the beginning of the article, the only case in which a member of the National Assembly has been expelled since the establishment of the National Assembly was in 1979, when Kim Young-sam, then president of the New Democratic Party, was expelled.

In fact, this case is close to an exception.

This is because, in fact, it is a case in which the ruling party unilaterally expelled the opposition leader under the dictatorship.

This unreasonable expulsion provoked protests from the citizens and spread to the Buma Democratic Uprising, which led to the October 26 Incident, in which former President Park Chung-hee was shot and killed after martial law was imposed.



Therefore, it is mainly in 1991 when the Special Ethics Committee of the National Assembly was first established.

In the more than 30 years since then, the National Assembly has never expelled a member of the National Assembly.

Former Grand National Party lawmaker Kang Yong-seok, who is now famous for the Garosero Research Institute, was almost expelled from the 18th National Assembly in 2011, but it was rejected at the plenary session, and the level of disciplinary action was drastically lowered to 'a 30-day suspension from the National Assembly'.

In the 19th National Assembly, the special ethics committee passed a proposal to expel independent Rep. Shim Hak-bong, who was investigated by the prosecution for sexual assault, but Shim resigned before the plenary session voted.

This is the reason why the Special Ethics Committee has been criticized for being famous all the time.



Of course, the National Assembly is the forefront of politics and is where political logic dominates.

There is some truth to the logic of protecting the power of the people for Rep. Park Deok-heum.

As it is a presidential election, it is natural in the political arena that the number is swayed by each person's calculations surrounding the presidential election.

On the contrary, it is only natural for citizens to be angry at the various controversies and suspicions of 'members'.

In the background of the deep-rooted political hatred of Korean citizens, there is a National Assembly that is always focused on protecting family members and is particularly generous with each other.

Yeouido's unique political logic makes citizens distrust the whole of politics.

This is also going to be the case.



Moreover, it was the National Assembly's Ethics Review Advisory Committee, made up of outside figures, that proposed the expulsion of Rep. Mi-hyang Yoon, Sang-jik Lee, and Deok-heum Park.

All of them are renowned academics and legal figures, who have been recommended by the Democratic Party and the People's Power themselves.

The content of the review by the Advisory Committee is said to be heavy and detailed enough to be kept secret until the day of the so-called review.

This means that the advisory committee went through an in-depth judgment process before recommending the expulsion of the three lawmakers.

If the logic is that 'expulsion cannot be done on suspicion alone', lawmakers can attend the second lieutenant and look into the contents.



Of course, no one said "I don't want to be expelled."

But the results are already predictable.

Tomorrow (14th) whether the National Assembly Ethics Special Committee will have a 'maybe' or 'request' day is up to the members of the National Assembly themselves.

One thing is clear: history repeats itself, but it is always recorded, and some citizens remember this history.