Demand Investigation in the National Assembly to Find out the Truth of Illegal Private Surveillance

[press conference]

Renouce Lee Myungbak Government of Illegal Private Surveillance and Privitization of Power!
Demand Investigation in the National Assembly to Find out Truth!

After the Lee administration took power, the democracy and rule of law in Korea have been repeatedly withdrawn. The National Intelligence Service (NIS) and Defense Security Command (DSC) illegally investigated a civilian and the police used torture in their investigation reminding us the dark shadow of the 5th Republic. In this case, however, the public officers illegally investigated a civilian and abused their authorities to ruin one’s life. Illegal investigations have been carried out by a newly established organization beyond the scope of an official command system. Therefore, this is a case of power-privitazation and administration monopoly. 

As this situation drew attention, the Prime Minister’s Office presented a coarse investigation report and requested an investigation of four accused of illegal acts to the Supreme Prosecutor’s Office (SPO). The SPO stated that they will assign the case to the Seoul Central branch and organize a special investigation team for further investigation, but they positioned themselves in investigating only those they were asked to investigate. This clearly confirms the SPO’s position that they will not investigate those encouraged and oversaw these illegal actions.  It has also been confirmed that the SPO connived the fault of the investigation on Jong-Ik Kim’s case. Thus, we, the PSPD, demand a thorough investigation conducted by the National Assembly apart from the investigation by the SPO.

 First, the investigation must examine the suspicion on the Public Service Ethics Office (PSEO).  The office was established in July 2008, when the candlelight vigils against importing the US beef were ongoing, and its initial process of establishment, employees, and tasks were hidden under a veil. It has been revealed that although the office was affiliated with the Prime Minister’s Office, Lee Young-Ho, the Blue House’s Employment and Labor Secretary, have intervened and been reported about organization’s foundation and employment, and the Civil Administration’s Office also received reports on related matters.  It should be clearly explained why and for what purpose the Public Service Ethics Office was founded.  Because it was founded after the time when criticism of President Lee reached its peak and it operated in the capacity beyond the normal official system, as if it were a powerful private organization, it is imperative to ensure that this office was not founded for the purpose of political prosecution or investigation of the dissents.

Second, it must be clear that there was neither additional illegal investigation nor political prosecution.  During first two months of the PSEO’s founding, the office abused its authority and conducted illegal inspections which resulted in ruining a civilian victim’s loss of employment and business shares.  And, the office’s wrongdoing does not end there.  It has been revealed that the chairman of the League committee in the Federation of Korea Trade Unions which worked in concert with the Grand National Party (Han Nara Dang) had been secretly followed by an official from the Prime Minister’s Office.  It is impossible to know for certain how many illegal private surveillances have been conducted under the direction of the PSEO during the past two years.  Thus, all and every illegal investigation and political prosecution carried out under the supervision of the PSEO must come to light.

Third, because there were illegal actions performed during the last two years yet failed to be sanctioned, the PSEO must be under the government’s protection. We must know who and which entity is behind the illegal acts.  It has been already discovered that the PSEO engaged in illegal acts such as authority abuse, imposing threats on financial institutions and illegal search.  Further, the PSEO asserted great pressure on prosecutors and police forces including commending certain investigations. It is impossible for such illegal acts to persist for a prolonged period and not be prosecuted, had not a powerful authority intervened and protected the wrongdoings. Therefore, it must be revealed who led and overlooked these illegalities by the National Assembly investigation.

Fourth, it must be investigated whether the president’s personal connection or proviate organization were involved in such illegal acts. Although the Youngpo Mokwoohoe is an informal social gathering, it will be a problem if members of the meeting are from the president’s hometown and established a personal network.  President Lee, too, connived the existence of this meeting although he knew about it.  Moreover, See-Joong Choi, the chairman of Korea Communications Commission, the real power of the authority and the assemblymen from the governing party were gathered and pledged to support to President Lee.  It is an already known fact the personnel from President Lee’s birthplace like Sang-Duk Lee, and See-Joong Lee are absolutely influential.  In addition, people directly involved in this case are all from the president’s hometown, and supervisions and reports were conducted informally rather than through the established official system.  This raises crucial concerns that it may be impossible to further the investigation without involving officials from the president’s hometown.

Emphasizing once again, this case is a crime in authorities that squarely ignored the rule of law and abused one’s power personally. As this involves people from the Prime Minister’s Office and Blue House, the thorough investigation by the National Assembly is necessary. The Blue House and Grand National Party (Governing Pary) should not regard the investigation request as a political attack.  If this case is sled away, it may bring a graver problem later. We urge to accept the investigation in the National Assembly over again to reveal the truth on illegal private surveillance and to check whether a unoffical meeting monopolized the state affairs or not.