▲ Representative Lee Jin-sook of the People Power Party drinks water during a comprehensive parliamentary audit of agencies, including the Broadcasting and Media Communications Commission, held by the National Assembly's Science, ICT, Broadcasting and Communications Committee on October 22.
Ruling and opposition parties clashed again today (October 22) at a parliamentary audit held by the National Assembly's Science, ICT, Broadcasting and Communications Committee over the recusal of Representative Lee Jin-sook of the People Power Party (PPP).
The rival parties offered contrasting interpretations of the Constitutional Court's partial granting yesterday (October 21) of an injunction suspending the parliamentary resolution to recuse Lee.
Lee and the PPP went on the offensive, claiming that the decision put the brakes on the recusal resolution led by the ruling Democratic Party of Korea (DPK), while the DPK countered that the necessity of a partial recusal regarding conflict-of-interest issues was upheld.
During today's audit, Lee said, "The Constitutional Court has ruled that it is wrong and inappropriate to exclude or recuse a specific lawmaker by weaponizing numbers."
Representative Kim Jang-kyom of the PPP also demanded an apology from the DPK, stating, "Even though Representative Lee made it clear that she would voluntarily step aside from matters she had personally decided, it is a fact that [the DPK] broadly restricted her speaking rights and gagged her."
On the other hand, DPK Representative Lee Jeong-heon pushed back, saying, "The essence of this decision is that a player cannot be a referee," adding, "It is by no means an exoneration for Representative Lee Jin-sook."
Representative Lee Ju-hee of the same party also pointed out, "When did we ever comprehensively block Representative Lee Jin-sook's questioning and audit process?" adding, "The decision should not be misrepresented as if [the injunction] was granted in full."
Committee Chair Song Ki-hun of the DPK intervened to mediate the clash between the rival lawmakers, saying, "I will conduct the meeting while strictly adhering to the intent of the Constitutional Court's decision." He added, "If any matters are deemed to be directly connected to lawmakers during today's Q&A session, I will explicitly suspend their remarks."
The Constitutional Court partially suspended the effect of the parliamentary audit recusal against Lee yesterday (October 21).
However, the court maintained the recusal for four matters: ▲ duties and decision-making she was involved in during her tenure as head of the Korea Communications Commission (KCC); ▲ resolutions passed under the KCC's two-member structure during her tenure regarding KBS board member recommendations, Foundation for Broadcast Culture board appointments, and consent for the EBS president's appointment; ▲ a case in which she was reported to prosecutors by the committee on charges of perjury during the 2025 parliamentary audit; and ▲ a case in which she was reported to prosecutors on charges of occupational breach of trust over allegations of personally misusing a corporate credit card during her tenure as president of Daejeon MBC.
The issue of recusing Representative Han Jun-ho, the DPK's ranking member on the committee, was another flashpoint between the parties.
The PPP demanded the recusal of Representative Han, who directly questioned KBS officials during the audit on October 16 regarding allegations of 'external pressure on KBS reporting' involving his own office, while the DPK fought back, defining the demand as an "attempt to dilute the issue."
Representative Lee Jin-sook said, "Applying the same logic, ranking member Han Jun-ho—who questioned KBS Journalists Association President Choi Kwang-ho, an involved party, about an issue concerning Han's own office right here in this audit room—ought to be recused."
Representative Kim Jang-kyom also remarked, "They stripped Representative Lee of her right to speak on grounds of conflict of interest, yet ranking member Han Jun-ho, who is the actual party to a conflict of interest, interrogated the KBS president and the head of the journalists association," calling it "a comedy."
In response, DPK Representative Kim Nam-guk argued, "They are attempting to water down the issue by lumping ranking member Han's KBS questioning together and asking 'Isn't this the same conflict of interest?', but the two matters are fundamentally different."
Han repeatedly denied the allegations, stating, "At the very least, an external-pressure call would involve calling the reporter who wrote the article to request deletion or modification, or, if that did not work, speaking to higher-ups to exert top-down pressure."
(Photo: Yonhap News)
※
Copying, redistribution, and unauthorized use in AI training are strictly prohibited.