[NewsNIGHT] Acting President Han, "A role devoted to state administration"

■ Host: anchor Sung Moon-gyu
■ Appearance: Jang Sung-ho, former president of Konkuk University Graduate School of Public Administration, Park Chang-hwan, special professor at Jangan University

* The text below may differ from the actual broadcast content, so please check the broadcast for more accurate information. Please specify [YTN NewsNIGHT] when quoting.

[Anchor]
It's a focus night time to look at news of political interest. Today, Jang Sung-ho, former president of Konkuk University Graduate School of Public Administration, and Park Chang-hwan, a special professor at Jangan University, are here. How are you? Acting President Han Deok-soo has decided to suspend the appointment of constitutional judges amid the passage of a motion to appoint three candidates for constitutional judges at the plenary session of the National Assembly. The opposition party immediately announced that it would impeach Han. Let's listen to your remarks in person.

[Han Deok-soo / Acting President: The opposition party is pressuring the acting president to exercise the president's unique power of appointing a constitutional institution without an agreement between the ruling and opposition parties. Looking back on our history, the weight of the position is evidenced by the fact that there was not a single constitutional judge appointed without an agreement between the ruling and opposition parties. I will hold off on the appointment of a constitutional judge until the ruling and opposition parties agree to submit the proposal. ]

[Park Chan-dae: It was a statement acknowledging that he was not acting as an acting president, but as an acting president of civil war. He exercised his veto, the most active exercise of authority, and made a sophistry of refusing to appoint a constitutional judge, the most formal exercise of authority. Today, former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun confessed that he made a preliminary report to Prime Minister Han Deok-soo before proposing the December 3 emergency martial law. It became clear that Prime Minister Han Deok-soo was a key member of the mission of the December 3 civil war. It also became clear what caused the incomprehensible behavior that had been shown since the impeachment of Yoon Suk Yeol. It became clear that Prime Minister Han Deok-soo had neither the qualifications to act as an acting president nor the will to defend the Constitution. ]

[Anchor]
In this way, the Democratic Party will see if Acting Constitutional Court Justice Han Deok-soo appoints three constitutional judges. At the same time, the impeachment was put on hold, but one acting authority put the appointment on hold. How did you like it?

[Jang Sung Ho]
If you listen to the impeachment request, you won't be impeached. No. If you listen to the appointment proposal, if you do, and if you don't, you will be impeached. How on earth is this to be said to the acting president in the National Assembly? Isn't this the abuse of impeachment the Democrats continue to impeach a couple of times? I don't know how long it will continue. Such political threats appeared quite deafening, and Acting President Han Duck-soo will likewise do so in accordance with the Constitution and laws. That's what I said, and fundamentally, shouldn't the case of judges in the Constitutional Court be the fairest? Since the constitutional petition is related to all the interests of the people, the ruling party and the opposition party should recommend it with a very equal share. However, in the past, one ruling party, one opposition party, one opposition party, and one opposition party agreed to do three, but this time, there are many Democrats in the agreement process, two people and one people's power. Isn't 2:1 not only against the fundamental purpose of the Constitutional Court, but also quite a lot of legal confusion? As the power of the Democratic Party and the people is quite at odds over whether the acting president can or cannot appoint it, I will decide whether or not to appoint it as the acting president after agreeing on such matters first in the political circle. I think it had that declarative meaning.

[Anchor]
This decision was made based on the consistent spirit contained in the Constitution and the law. You once again emphasized the position of acting Han Deok-soo.

[PARK CHANG HWAN]
I think our people would have explained and been very angry. A majority of the judiciary say there is nothing wrong with the appointment of an acting constitutional judge. The Constitutional Court said there was no problem, the Supreme Court said there was no problem, and the candidates for the Constitutional Court recommended by the ruling and opposition parties said there was no problem. Even the majority of the sovereign people want a nine-member constitutional judge system. I don't understand why the majority of the judiciary, the majority of the judiciary, and the people are saying they will hold off indefinitely until there is an agreement between the ruling and opposition parties. In fact, it is impossible to reach an agreement between the ruling and opposition parties. It's like there's no apology or reflection on the victim, and my child is in jail because he's a little wrong, but I don't know if he's guilty or innocent until the trial is over. They want us to get an agreement from the families of these perpetrators. How on earth is this a case? In the end, the six-member system, or if it is prolonged like this, will become a four-member system in April, and the Constitutional Court's impeachment hearing will be virtually nullified. Such doubts are inevitable, and in the end, acting as an acting authority cannot resolve the current uncertainty in state affairs and public anxiety. I think this is the judgment that the people have seen today.

[Jang Sung Ho]
What the acting president is talking about the constitution and the law that he just talked about is the interpretation, foundation, and judgment of some law. This is in the Constitutional Court. Therefore, I think this is possible as a judge or as a personal opinion in the Supreme Court. And while the majority of the people say this is possible, there are quite a few people who say this is not possible, right? Therefore, in order to give an opinion on this, in the end, the Constitutional Court must make a decision on this through a competency dispute trial or a constitutional petition, but it is quite difficult to say that there is public trust in doing it with the individual opinion of the Constitutional Court.

[Anchor] Let me ask you one more question. What Chairman Woo Won-sik said today was that three constitutional judges had already agreed and recommended it at the National Assembly. There were two opposition parties, so the power of the people added one more later, and there was already a process like this, so it doesn't make sense to agree again. That's how I said it today.

[Jang Sung Ho]
We tried to do that in the first place, but didn't we get the Democratic Party to proceed with this because of Lee Jin-sook, chairman of the Communications Commission? That's the situation then, and in the current situation, emergency martial law occurs from the perspective of the people's power, and the president is in the Constitutional Court, so we can agree on this in detail, of course, but didn't the Democratic Party unilaterally replace it even though the people's power did not enter the confirmation hearing and the people's power already decided to take charge of the chairman of the confirmation hearing? I don't think this is a ruling-opposition agreement. So, even if it was officially coordinated in advance, democracy is procedural democracy, so if the opposition party decided to chair the confirmation hearing, the opposition party should just chair it, but didn't the Democratic Party unilaterally replace it with lawmaker Park Ji-won? That's why the power of the people didn't go in here, and this is not an agreement we have, and the people's power did not go into the vote, so from the standpoint of the people's power, I don't think the ruling party and the opposition agreed.

[PARK CHANG HWAN]
I am very concerned today about the refusal to appoint such an acting commissioner, because there are now roles in the legislature, the judiciary and the executive branch. It's called the separation of powers. There is no choice but to worry that this separation of powers may act as a solidarity to delay the impeachment trial. First of all, he says he will appoint the acting president when the ruling and opposition parties agree. Then, what the power of the ruling party people is called now is that they should not be appointed. Then there was a report that one of the six members of the Constitutional Court said that six members cannot make a final judgment on the impeachment trial because there are no three recommended by the National Assembly. In this case, these three people are creating a structure in which the three of them can divide their roles like a squirrel wheel and eventually decide on the impeachment trial against President Yoon Suk Yeol. The bottom line is that the martial law civil war cannot be punished, and the public has no choice but to question whether it is done by sharing roles with each other.

[Anchor]
So, as I put the appointment on hold, the Democratic Party said it would wait until the 27th, but said it would vote tomorrow, so I reported it today. So, the plan is to vote tomorrow, but controversy continues over how many votes will be needed to impeach the acting president. Let's listen to the related remarks and talk about them.

[Park Hyung-soo / Deputy floor leader of People's Power: (The quorum for impeachment of Han Deok-soo) is 200 seats, there are various data and positions, and the recent constitutional commentary says 200 seats, and the party has no disagreement on that. ]

[Kang Yoo-jung / Minjoo Party floor spokesman: The moment the National Assembly speaker makes a decision with 151 seats will be a precedent and will function as a kind of precedent. Therefore, it can be seen that the interpretation of the chairman is more important than the presentation of various opinions that it is a path that has not been taken. ]

[Anchor]
is against. Only when two-thirds of the registered lawmakers approve it will it be impeached. What do you think is right?

[Jang Sung Ho]
I think the Democratic Party member's interpretation can be a precedent. I think I made a very dangerous remark.

[Anchor]
National Assembly Speaker Woo Won-sik says a majority is enough.

[Jang Sung Ho]
The Speaker of the National Assembly is only the head of the National Assembly's legislature, and all constitutional interpretation, constitution, and law interpretation powers are in the Constitutional Court. Therefore, the speaker of the National Assembly conducts various meetings or such, and it is dangerous for the speaker to judge this because it is a very dangerous issue. Of course, if the majority exceeds 151, it can be passed, but if the majority is passed like that, acting Han Deok-soo will not accept this. What would you do if I told you that I would continue in the role of acting? And if this was a wrong decision at the Constitutional Court by filing a constitutional petition later, I think National Assembly Speaker Woo Won-sik will be responsible for it, and I think I should basically listen to the Democratic Party of Korea and talk about it first. And isn't there a lot of different theories about 151 people or more than 2,200 people? According to the commentary published by the Constitutional Court Research Institute in 2015, the quorum of impeachment motion and decision by the acting president is based on that of the acting public official. The standard is more than 200 seats, two-thirds. However, the commentary says that if only the prime minister, not the acting president, is impeached, it may be 151 seats. But aren't there five articles of impeachment? 12. He called a Cabinet meeting on the 12th civil war situation, the Special Prosecutor Act on Chae Sang-byung, and sought to transfer power to Han Dong-hoon, the former representative of the People's Power, after the civil war. These three are about the prime minister, and the obligation to push for a permanent special prosecution against civil war. This is an acting president. And the Constitutional Court's refusal to appoint a judge. If you refuse tomorrow. In this case, these two things were done from the standpoint of the acting authority, so first of all, this has to be 200 seats. In addition, the National Assembly's legislative investigation office interpreted the vote four times, and there should be 200 in 2016 and 200 senior experts in the steering committee in 2023. Also, Kim Han-gyu's office said that there were 151 people recently. And what Kim Eun-hye did in the office is that 151 people and 200 people all coexist. So if you look at the intersection of this, it seems that 200 people are right, but I don't think the speaker has the authority to interpret this right now. It's quite dangerous.

[Anchor]
As Professor Jang said, the five reasons for impeachment put forward by the Democratic Party are mixed with three reasons as prime minister and two reasons as acting president. When it was reported to the National Assembly today, it reported the impeachment motion against Prime Minister Han Deok-soo. That's what I called it. Professor Park, do you think this will be controversial later?

[PARK CHANG HWAN]
I think the Democratic Party of Korea also had a lot of such concerns. So, in fact, even though there was an original sin of failing to prevent the last martial law rebellion, it was recognized as an agent for the cause of state stability. But as anyone can see, we wouldn't have pushed for impeachment without today's decision. However, if you impeach the acting prime minister only with the duties of the acting president, as you said earlier, why did you impeach him without exceeding 200 seats? It's not retroactive because it could become a problem later. The Democratic Party of Korea also had such concerns about the past, and the fact that it neglected and assisted the martial law civil war was included together. In the end, the Democratic Party of Korea added two or three comprehensive reasons to the impeachment reasons to make up for the legal deficiencies that will occur later, and the Democratic Party put them into the reasons. I think I can say that.

[Anchor]
However, if the ruling party decides that the impeachment was passed with less than two-thirds of the time, the people will apply for an injunction to suspend the validity of the Constitutional Court and consider a dispute trial. If this happens, acting Han Deok-soo will continue to serve, right? What's going to happen?

[PARK CHANG HWAN]
However, if I ask the Constitutional Court to fight for legal authority, the Constitutional Court has no choice but to do it very quickly. When we do an administrative trial for provisional disposition, the results come out very fast. Of course, there will be about a day or two of legal hearing time, but the Constitutional Court will make a decision quickly, so I think. What's important is acting as prime minister. He clearly presented his work as prime minister as a reason for impeachment and impeached him based on that part as the main argument, so it also includes some of his work as acting president, but it will not be a big problem to vote with 151 seats because it is the reason for impeachment on the illegal matters he did during his prime ministerial days. I think a lot of people see it like this.

[Anchor] I'm going to ask this question to Professor
. When the Constitutional Court held a vote on three judges today, the ruling party effectively did not participate in the vote due to the party's argument. Although it was not a party argument, the ruling party effectively said it would not participate in the vote due to the party's argument, and some even said it was almost unanimous. But four people from the ruling party attended the vote today. And 195 when it actually goes through. So, there are 192 opposition parties in total, but anyway, the ruling party had a yes vote. What do you think about this in real life? Possibility of the ruling party's departure vote in the impeachment vote of acting Han Deok-soo? What do you think of the possibility that it's actually over two-thirds?

[Jang Sung Ho]
The power of the people is not set as the party's theory, so it can be entered. Most of them said let's not go in. Didn't you get into the party line last time? That's why, from the standpoint of the people's power, I think this is not in perfect order like the Democratic Party's unipolar system, but it's quite chaotic right now, and the party is out of control, and yet it's a minority. I think about four or five people left, but if this became a party theory, in the past, if it violates the party theory, you can take measures to leave the party or something. However, the fact that floor leader Kwon Sung-dong did not make it a party platform because he has yet to become the emergency committee chairman is the party platform, and if he did so by joining the plenary session on the party platform, someone will surely go in to avoid such a move, as it would be subject to disciplinary action. For example, I don't know if there are some close relationships in the past or if there are close relationships now. Some close friends will go in and vote. That's why I think it wasn't a surprise party argument, but just a recommendation. I don't think three or four people are that negative in terms of party diversity or autonomy.

[Anchor]
First of all, lawmakers Cho Kyung-tae, Kim Sang-wook, Kim Ye-ji, and Han Ji-ah were included in today's vote on the nomination of candidates, and those who were previously classified as close lawmakers were included.

[Jang Sung Ho]
They are the most open people who impeach Yoon Suk Yeol and representative Han Dong-hoon as future presidential candidates, so I went in today and probably will continue to do so.

[Anchor]
If the impeachment vote is real tomorrow, even if there is a decision on whether the people's power will boycott the vote due to the party's theory or not, it remains to be seen whether they will participate in the vote personally. He's accused of going out with President Yoon today. Former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun's lawyers held a press conference. We've expressed our official position on the alleged rebellion, and we'll listen to what it was about.

[Yoo Seung-soo / Kim Yong-hyun, former defense minister's lawyer: First, to raise the alarm about political corruption using the National Assembly. Second, it is to resolve and investigate public suspicions about the election of the Republic of Korea. Third, it is to establish positions in various parts of our society and to pass on a free Korea to future generations by organizing pro-North Korean juche and anti-state forces. The president's declaration of a legitimate emergency martial law cannot be a civil war. ]

[Anchor]
This is the first time that former Minister Kim Yong-hyun has announced his position since the emergency martial law incident. What do you think is the reason for holding such a sudden press conference?

[PARK CHANG HWAN]
In fact, until he was arrested and arrested at first, he seemed almost desperate. Everything is what I instructed you to do. It's my responsibility. And I gave up without being too proud of myself. When I see something like this, this is how he gives up everything. You're taking the lead. I saw it like this, and the president's position came out recently. That's why we actually saw the president's guidelines and entered the public opinion battle accordingly. You can only look at it like this. Nevertheless, today, for example, certain media companies were not allowed to come in by saying that they were producing fake news, and there was a dispute over it, but in the end, it is not a matter of constitutional dispute even if we listen to today's lawyer earlier. It sounded like a so-called instigation that all the conservatives should be paid for the pro-North Korean left. After all, if you look at the timing and guesses that fit the current president's guidelines, you will finally appeal for the gathering of conservatives and hold a public opinion war to prolong the impeachment trial. So, the ruling party refused to appoint a constitutional judge and held out that one of the constitutional judges could not decide with six members. If this happens, it will eventually lead to this logical consequence of prolonging the situation and destroying President Yoon Suk Yeol's impeachment trial, so today's press conference is even suspecting that the ruling camp is moving in order under the leadership of President Yoon Suk Yeol.

[Anchor]
In fact, there is something similar to what the president said last time, so one of them is the president's authority to rule martial law. So I told you today at this press conference that I was not subject to investigation. Kim Yong-hyun's lawyer.

[Jang Sung Ho]
The Declaration of Emergency Security, Dec. 12, the President's statement to the public on Dec. 12, and today's briefing on former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun's lawyer. These three things are contextually the same. Isn't it bound to prepare for the Constitutional Court and the court's trial process in the future? The president said, "This is not a civil war but an act of governance. It was within the constitutional boundaries. Of course, criminally, there are many things that can be a violation of martial law. Because troops enter various parliaments and destroy objects, such things can be a violation of martial law law. Nevertheless, since the most important thing for the president is to prove that this is not a crime of rebellion through the Constitutional Court trial, doesn't former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun, who proposed martial law today, immediately be prosecuted for explaining the situation's intention and purpose that he has suggested to the president? That's why I think I did a press briefing before that because public opinion is very intense on both sides through the media, I think they need to unify their various organized opinions.

[Anchor]
Then we'll look at today's press conference in more detail. The decree announced at the time of the emergency martial law said that former Minister Kim Yong-hyun drafted it and President Yoon made some revisions. Let's hear for ourselves what that was like.

[Yoo Seung-soo / Kim Yong-hyun, former Defense Minister's lawyer: (On Pogo-ryeong, Damhwamun, Gyeomseonpo-moon, etc.) Former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun drafted it. Most of the contents were written by Minister Kim Yong-hyun, and the President reviewed and revised some of them. ]

[Lee Ha-sang / Former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun: According to the martial law law, it is stipulated that the Minister of Defense or the Minister of Public Administration and Security makes a recommendation to the President through the Prime Minister. There was a cabinet meeting that day. There was a Cabinet meeting, and Minister Kim clearly said that he first reported to the Prime Minister in advance, spoke to him, and then made suggestions to the President. As for the operation of the arrest team. Of course, the arrest team operates. Planning the operation of the arrest team is a normal business that belongs to martial law.... ]

[Anchor]
Who wrote martial law proclamation No. 1? I was very curious and controversial, but former Minister Kim Yong-hyun wrote it. And some presidents have revised it. That's what I said. There are even specific provisions.

[PARK CHANG HWAN]
I don't know if I should believe everything.Even if Ma believes in it, in the end, martial law is originally called martial law to protest that they did not violate the law. In order for martial law to be announced, the Minister of Defense or the Minister of Public Administration and Security must suggest it to the President through the Prime Minister. So, it is not a violation of the law because the decree was made by the Minister of National Defense and the president himself corrected it. It was an announcement today to emphasize that it is not unconstitutional martial law. But in fact, if you look at the contents, it was announced that the Prime Minister, who was talking about in the law, should go through, but eventually collected it. It has never been reported to the Prime Minister in advance. In the end, the Prime Minister denied that it was actually not a deliberation. Many Cabinet members said it was not a Cabinet meeting. That's why they couldn't even keep what they said. Second, the core of decree No. 1 is about the prohibition of political activities. Our Constitution of 1987 does not have the right to dissolve the National Assembly on martial law. There is practically no right to arrest the National Assembly members. However, the operation of the arrest team is natural, and the president did not impose a nighttime curfew. And he did not block lawmakers from entering. The president has not won a majority of the martial law forces, so take it out quickly. Didn't you order it like this? It's not just one or two people who testified. In that sense, today's defense of the lawyer is nothing more than a logical fitting to argue that they have obeyed the law, and we have no choice but to see it that way.

[Anchor]
It's like this when you hear it at first glance. The defense team reviewed and revised it by the president himself. Then, if the president revised the decree, wouldn't he have been directly involved? You might feel like this, but what the lawyers wanted to say was that the president wanted to sound the alarm in the National Assembly, to delete the curfew, saying that martial law was not directed at the general public. In a way, it was a statement that seemed to defend the president.

[Jang Sung-ho]
5.16 If you look at the Park Chung-hee coup or the Chun Doo-hwan coup on December 12, there are quite a lot of proclamations. Even if you search the Internet, it comes out, and if you look there, there is always a curfew. The fact that it was taken out is not intended for the entire nation, but an emergency decree to warn the National Assembly and the NEC. I think the reason why I appeal that today is to go to the Constitutional Court later and argue that this was not my purpose. If you search on Naver or something about Pogoryeong, it comes out. That's why the minister is probably from the military. Perhaps this overlooked the lack of the right to dissolve the National Assembly. It's not like we're going to reveal it to many people, so how many people wouldn't have done it alone or with anyone? If martial law is invoked across the country against the decree, the president is the chief martial law officer nationwide. That's why the president must know this. You need to know about the decree. In such a situation, the president would have confirmed that the minister himself had written this, but the legal review had been completed. It seems to have been recognized as such and deleted only that and it appears to have been done like this.

[Anchor]
Finally, let's look at the direct investigation into President Yoon. President Yoon was summoned on the 25th, and I told him to attend yesterday, but he didn't. So, the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit sent a third request for attendance on Sunday the 29th. The possibility of an arrest warrant was also mentioned, but if it doesn't come out again. How do you see this possibility?

[PARK CHANG HWAN]
Actually, I don't know if it's meaningful to send a third attendance request. I already said through lawyer Seok Dong-hyun that President Yoon Suk Yeol is focusing on the impeachment trial. In the end, he has no intention of cooperating with the investigation until then. In fact, it's a situation where I revealed it like this. Then, from the point of view of the investigation now, in the end, there are usually three requests for attendance in the procedure for forced recruitment, so it is said that they send it to accumulate such reasons, but no one expects it to come out here. Eventually, I have to clarify what I will do when it doesn't come out even on the 29th. Many people are red-handed in the civil war. The current criminal of the civil war is very angry about the situation, which even refuses to investigate by the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, and wasn't he a former prosecutor? What would have happened if Yoon Suk-yeol had been a prosecutor in the past about the suspect who is so blatantly refusing to investigate? He probably took the prosecutor and police and arrested them right away. In that sense, isn't the response of the current Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit too complacent? I hope you know that there is criticism from the people like this.

[Anchor]
That's why Oh Dong-woon, the head of the Airborne Division, came to the National Assembly last time and said that it is a principle to arrest and investigate rebellion monsters. That's why people keep talking about arrest warrants and arrests.

[Jang Sung Ho]
Even if it came out, didn't President Yoon Suk Yeol announce it twice in a public statement that this was not a crime of rebellion? So I will go to the Constitutional Court and argue about this first and then investigate.
That's what it means. If you go to the Constitutional Court and say that this is not a crime of rebellion, won't the criminal prosecution be stopped? I think I was aiming for that because of this situation. The prosecution handed it over to the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit, but does the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit have a lot of manpower? For example, if you talk about it as a doctor in a hospital, you are only an undergraduate student in medical school. Therefore, even if the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit makes an emergency arrest, it cannot penetrate 900 to 1,000 bodyguards, and even if it makes an arrest, is there any data to issue an arrest warrant within 48 hours? There's nothing, isn't there? That's why it must be very frustrating for the Senior Civil Servant Corruption Investigations Unit. However, since there is a public interest on the surface, I don't know what to do after the third summons and the fourth summons, but nevertheless, since the request for an arrest warrant is of no benefit, isn't there any other way to investigate? I don't think this is urgent right now because there are written investigations and other things. Because even if you become a special prosecutor, you go to the special prosecutor, but you have about 60 days to prepare for the special prosecution. That's why it's delayed again, and I think it's delayed by 2-3 months anyway.

[Anchor]
If it doesn't come out by the 29th, it will be a situation where the real offense and defense office is struggling even more. I'll stop listening to you two. Jang Sung-ho, former president of Konkuk University Graduate School of Public Administration, and Park Chang-hwan, a special professor at Jangan University. Thank you both.