ambivalence sometimes evaporates everyone's responsibility.
Because everyone did something wrong, in the end, it tends to lead to no one did anything wrong.
The 'wavelength' is only called 'error' only in logic, but it exerts considerable power in reality.
The criticism that the Democratic Party and the people as well as the Democratic Party made a mistake in the process of trying to 'check and shut down' and the process of billing contains the truth.
However, this kind of bipartisan theory can dilute the responsibility of the Democratic Party, which has rushed forward to 'close the inspection' after the election.
Since the starting point was the Democratic Party in the first place, it is right that the Democratic Party should be held responsible for the promotion and legislation.
Enlarging an image
Democrats, if they had won the election, they wouldn't have pushed ahead with 'check-and-run'
If the Democrats had won the election, would they have pushed for a 'check-and-run'?
Why did the Democratic Party and the Moon Jae-in administration not push ahead with the 'examination and overhaul', which they claim to be 'normalization of the prosecution', at an early stage, when everyone said it was the best time for reform?
Why did the current government rush into office with less than a month left after losing the presidential election?
As the Democratic Party asserts, is 'check-and-run' for all people?
It's not a difficult question.
Prosecution reform for the people was mobilized as a means to unite the camp, and 'check-and-run' was reduced to a political tool.
As a result, there was no review of the contents of 'Inspection Completed'.
There was only the slogan of 'prosecution reform', which seemed just, and the review of the side effects that the system claimed to be reform could cause was omitted.
In a sense, it was natural that the evaluation of the 1 year and 4 months of adjustment of the prosecutor's and police investigation authority, called the 1st prosecution reform, was omitted.
The devil is always in the details.
There was a series of criticisms about the problems that the 'check-and-run' promoted by the Democratic Party, led by civil society, could cause problems.
It is for those who have long and intensely advocated 'prosecution reform' than anyone else.
The reason was simple.
As anyone can become a victim or a perpetrator of a case, changes in the judicial system are directly related to the lives of the people.
Focusing on the substance rather than the slogan, it was intended to consider the side effects of systemic changes that could affect the lives of all citizens.
The Democratic Party's 'check-and-run'
However, the Democratic Party responded
, "Disagreements on specific issues can be resolved in an overnight, and by discussing them all night long" (Hwang Un-ha, CBS Radio <Bout> 4/20)
.
It was at the time when the Democratic Party's original bill was being pushed forward with the content of 'examined and completed' before the National Assembly Speaker's arbitration bill came out.
The answer that the judicial system change for the first time in decades can be solved in one evening was surprising.
At the time when the arbitration plan for the Speaker of the National Assembly was proposed and the issue of 'identity' in the police transfer case became an issue, this position came from a Democratic member of the National Assembly Judiciary Committee, the standing committee in charge of the bill.
"I'm not a lawyer, so I'll have to check it again now." (Kim Young-bae, CBS Radio <Bout> 4/30)
He was pushing forward with the bill without knowing the details of the bill.
The previous two answers were close to an honest confession of the Democratic Party's process of pushing ahead with 'check-and-run'.
After all sorts of expedients such as strategic sabotage, evading party tricks, neutralizing filibusters by splitting sessions, and promulgating the bill on the day the bill is passed, the Inspection and Complete Bill is about to go into effect.
It is an ironic situation that the Moon Jae-in administration, who opened his term through the 'prosecution's investigation into corruption', ended his term with 'complete inspection'.
As in the case of the corruption investigation that mobilized the prosecution five years ago, the ‘people’ and ‘
What was the purpose of the 'check-and-run', which was processed at the end of a speed war reminiscent of a military operation?
Whatever the intention, the bill, which was created as a speed war, was raged, with holes everywhere.
The design of the system is based on the premise of distrust, but can the 'check-and-run', which presupposes distrust in the prosecution and trust in the police, can even realize the intentions of the Democratic Party and the Moon Jae-in administration?
It's worth watching.
Enlarging an image
Agreed on the arbitration plan by the People's Power to provide the justification for the compulsory treatment of the Democratic Party
From now on, it is about the people's power and responsibility in the phase of 'checking and shutting down'.
It is a very politically engineered story that is separate from the legitimacy of the content of the bill.
Criticism from the progressive civil society camp followed the Democratic Party's push for 'checking and shutting down'.
It is an unusual situation in which the power of the people of the conservative party and the progressive camp agree.
It was a reenactment of the Democratic Party's attempt to enforce the Media Arbitration Act last year.
From a political standpoint, it seemed that the people's power had nothing to lose in the 'check-and-run' phase.
No, it looked like there was more to be gained.
However, on the 22nd of last month, Kwon Seong-dong, floor leader of the People's Power, who was opposed to the Democratic Party's overhaul, suddenly agreed to an arbitration plan by the Speaker of the National Assembly.
It contains 'less scrutiny' compared to the original bill of the Democratic Party, which tried to completely limit all investigations by the prosecution, but it was quite a setback from the point of view of the people.
The People's Power leadership cited the theory of reality, which has no power to prevent the compulsory processing of the Democratic Party, a dinosaur party with a majority in the majority, as the background of the agreement.
However, this agreement changed the battlefield.
The starting point of the discussion shifted to an arbitration bill, which provided justification for the Democrats' enforcement action.
Due to the deterioration of public opinion, the people's power broke the agreement, but the fact that an 'agreement' was reached was a slap on the face to want to cry from the Democratic Party's point of view.
It was to provide the Democratic Party with an escape route to share the arrow of the deteriorating public opinion with the power of the people.
It was no wonder that the progressive civil society camp, which was strategically aligned with the power of the people, began to depart.
Since then, the Democratic Party has consistently shouted 'agreed plan', and a sketch of 'democracy' has been staged in the mouth of a member of the legislature who slyly withdrew only to pass the bill.
This is the result of an agreement on the mediation plan of the People's Power that provided an excuse.
'Agreement' was also cited by the progressive Justice Party, which voted for and abstained from bills criticized by the progressive camp.
In an interview with a broadcaster, President Moon, who had been avoiding expressing his position on scrutiny, announced the bill that had been passed over by the National Assembly after all sorts of trickery, and it was also 'agreement between the ruling and opposition parties'.
The reason the Speaker of the National Assembly, who approved the fraudulent sabotage and decided to split the session to neutralize the filibuster, was also 'agreement'.
This would not have happened if the people's power had not reached an agreement on the arbitration plan.
An agreement on the arbitration plan that came out of criticism from within the People's Power
There are no assumptions in history.
If the power of the people had not reached an agreement on the arbitration bill, the Democrats might have forced the bill to be overhauled.
There may not have been a card more attractive than cutting off the demonized prosecutor's limbs as a tool to prevent the split of supporters following the presidential defeat and to hold the political interest of the strong supporters.
As a ruling party member said to independent lawmaker Yang Hyang-ja, there may have been an existential threat that he could go to jail if he didn't 'check it out'.
Therefore, the original bill might have passed without the mediation bill.
This is a place where I am not going to talk about political engineering, so let's look at it again.
If the Democrats had enforced the original plan, would the people's power have more to gain or lose more than it is now politically?
If the mediation plan had not been agreed upon, it could have increased the clarity of opposition to the Democratic Party's attempt to overhaul it.
There was no excuse for saying, 'You came to an agreement and now why are you talking nonsense'.
It could have continued the rare situation of strategic solidarity with the progressive civil society camp.
The unilateral treatment of the Democratic Party could 'relatively' increase the likelihood of winning in the Constitutional Court's dispute over authority.
The fact of the agreement became known, and criticism came from within the People's Power.
One lawmaker criticized the
arbitration agreement itself, saying,
"It may be criticized that the ruling and opposition parties are ferocious to exclude election crimes and public officials from the prosecution's primary investigation target
.
"
Another senator
said
"
Isn't the agreement on the premise that the police's investigative powers do not reach that of the current prosecutors' contradiction in terms of maintaining the total amount of corruption investigation capabilities?
"
Enlarging an image
What was the reason for the 'agreement' by Kwon Seong-dong, floor leader of the People's Power?
People's Power Floor Leader Kwon Seong-dong later apologized for an 'error of judgment', but it seems that there was a reason for the agreement on the arbitration plan in addition to the reality that there was no way to prevent the Democrats from forcing the process.
It is reported that floor leader Kwon explained to nearby lawmakers that he
had no choice but to make concessions, as the cooperation of a majority of the Democratic Party was essential for the formation of the next government cabinet, such as the approval of Prime Minister Han Deok-soo, and to revise the government organization law in the future
.
In this regard, some criticize whether it has fallen into the 'dogma of co-operation'.
At the bottom of this criticism are complaints that it has led to a difficult fight that can be easily won, and complaints that he was able to score only one point in a situation where he could score big.
Distrust has arisen in the strategy and judgment of the floor leader, and from the position of floor leader Kwon, his leadership has been scratched from the beginning of his inauguration.
(I will confirm again, but the discussion now is a very political engineering story in the phase of 'checking and shutting down')
However, much of the reason for the failure of floor leader Kwon's judgment and the crisis of leadership is largely attributed to Yoon Seok-yeol, who served as the background to the election of the floor leader. ) can also be viewed as provided by
President-elect Yoon Seok-yeol's conflicting stances on 'check-out' and 'Jung Ho-young's candidate'
President-elect Yoon Seok-yeol, who resigned as the Prosecutor General and declared his participation in politics in opposition to the Democratic Party's push for 'check and complete', did not take a special position.
He said through his spokesman that he was "watching" the progress of the National Assembly, but it was interpreted as trying to distance himself from the National Assembly.
Changes in the judicial system directly affect the lives of the people, but the message that "the elected person is most focused on restoring the people's livelihood" heightened the interpretation of distancing.
In some circles, the president-elect Yoon Seok-yeol has the title of 'from the prosecution', but there are also observations that he is deliberately distancing himself from the prosecution.
This ambiguous message from President-elect Yoon Seok-yeol (side) may have caused confusion in setting the negotiation strategy and marginal line of floor leader Kwon Seong-dong, the People's Power.
It is said that floor leader Kwon exchanged opinions with the elected (the side) several times in relation to the 'check-and-run' agreement.
The specific message that “the elected person is the same as the prosecutor-general at the time that he was the prosecutor-general to complete the investigation and complete the corruption” came out only after the arbitration plan was agreed upon.
Regarding this situation, within the People's Power, doubts arose as to whether there was a problem with communication between the floor leader Seong-dong Kwon, 'Yun Hee-kwan' and the elected person.
On the other hand, there was an observation that the work that the elected person and floor leader Kwon had discussed was arranged in such a way that it was arranged in such a way that the president-elect Kwon took responsibility when the public opinion hit a headwind.
Whatever the process and the reasons, it is clear that as a result, the leadership of floor leader Kwon and the political power of the party called the power of the people were damaged.
Enlarging an image
The facts of injustice must come out"…Options limited to the position of the elected person
There is also an interpretation that the position of President-elect Yoon Seok-yeol regarding the appointment of the first cabinet also influenced Kwon's misjudgment.
After Chung Ho-young, former head of Kyungpook National University Hospital, was nominated as the Minister of Health and Welfare as Yoon-elect's 'old friend', various suspicions were raised and critical public opinion was boiling.
Suspicions related to the transfer of children were also called a reenactment of the 'fatherland crisis' that triggered Yoon's political participation.
It was a situation that could be a fatal blow to the President-elect Yoon and, furthermore, the Yoon Seok-yeol administration, who advocated 'fairness and common sense' as the banner.
However, President-elect Yoon's position on the allegations of candidate Jung Ho-young was that
"there must be certain facts of injustice
. "
Regarding the allegations of her children, she said, "I will be watching everything," and made a position through a spokesperson to the effect that there was no 'injustice' among the allegations raised by the opposition parties and the media.
In the process of personnel hearings, it is difficult to clearly reveal the 'facts of injustice' unless there is an investigation.
The same was true in the case of the country.
This position of President-elect Yoon was enough to be interpreted as a signal that he would push ahead with the appointment of Ho-Young Jeong.
From the perspective of the People's Power leadership, this position of President-elect Yoon could be interpreted as a signal that they must somehow cover the candidates for the Cabinet, including candidate Chung.
If President-elect Yoon's message was interpreted in this way, it could have limited the options of floor leader Kwon Seong-dong in the 'check-and-run' phase.
The statement that “we had to make concessions to the extent that we had to seek the cooperation of the Democratic Party for the formation of the next cabinet, such as candidate Han Deok-soo,” can be seen as saying that the choice of floor leader Kwon Seok-yeol was effectively forced by the elected Yoon Seok-yeol.
In other words, it is possible to interpret whether there is a limit to how the floor leader Kwon can persuade Yoon-elect.
'Kwon Seong-dong Ho', who is in crisis during the 'examination and complete failure' state... Will it be a measure of future party relations?
After winning the presidential election, President-elect Yoon Seok-yeol said,
"
If
the government takes over, it will become not only a 'Yun Seok-yeol administration' but also a 'government of people's power'
.
He was declaring party-centered state management.
Rep. Kwon Seong-dong's election as the floor leader 'Yun Hee-kwan' reflected the expectations within the party for close consultations between the political parties.
However, the irony of Kwon Seong-dong, who faced a crisis in his leadership in the phase of 'checking and shutting down', when it seemed that there was more to be gained from political engineering, raises questions about whether close consultations between the political parties are being carried out properly.
In addition, the question arises as to whether the direction of consultation is being conducted in one direction rather than two directions.
There is an observation that the dissonance between the party and the elected president in the phase of 'checking and shutting down' may become an event that presupposes the relationship between the party and the government over the next five years.
(Photo = National Assembly Photo Reporters, provided by the Office of the President-elect's Spokesperson, Yonhap News)