- Chuseok Public Sentiment? Severe Economic Anxiety... Fatigued by Personnel Conflicts
- People Power Party Strategy Toward Ruling Camp? Filibuster Against 'Fabricated Indictment' Special Counsel
- Parliamentary Audit Must Report to Public... 'Off-Floor Struggles' Also Necessary
- Jang Dong-hyeok Visiting Olympic Park? Listening to Public Sentiment There Is Also Important
- Deliberations on Youth Policy, Visiting Baengnyeongdo, and Other Livelihood Actions Underway
- Farmland Probe Sparks Outcry Among Farmers... Concerns Over Farmland Confiscation
- Lee Administration 'Departing with Doors Open'... Throwing Out Policies Without Blueprints
- DMZ Blast 100% Landmine Laid by North Korean Military... Must Respond Resolutely
- Loudspeakers Removed, Making Countermeasures Questionable
- Lee's Remarks on Presidential Term? A Starting Point, but Must Be Clarified
- Constitutional Revision Discussions Possible if No Consecutive or Additional Terms Are Explicitly Ruled Out
- Opposed to Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae's Audit Testimony... He Will Likely Appear as He Has Much to Say
 
■ Broadcast: SBS Kim Tae-hyun's Political Show (FM 103.5 MHz 7:00 – 9:00)
■ Date: Tuesday, September 29, 2026
■ Host: Attorney Kim Tae-hyun
■ Guest: Representative Lim I-ja (People Power Party)
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: As previewed earlier, we are joined by Representative Lim I-ja, the Policy Committee Chair of the People Power Party. We will discuss the public sentiment gathered during the Chuseok holiday and the People Power Party's upcoming parliamentary strategy toward the ruling bloc. Welcome, Representative.
 
▶ Lim I-ja: Hello.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Representative, it has been quite a while.
 
▶ Lim I-ja: Please invite me more often.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Of course. Representative, over the Chuseok holiday, you must have been in Seoul and traveled down to your constituency in Sangju, visiting various places. What was the public sentiment you gathered from our citizens over the Chuseok break?
 
▶ Lim I-ja: It was not good. No matter how much the Democratic Party and the Lee Jae-myung administration claim economic indicators have improved, the actual sentiment felt by ordinary citizens is that making a living is genuinely difficult. On top of that, looking at how national affairs are being run, people feel too anxious to bear it. That was the local sentiment I heard.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: So first, there is dissatisfaction with the economy, that livelihood conditions are not improving.
 
▶ Lim I-ja: That is correct.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: And why are people dissatisfied with how national affairs are being run?
 
▶ Lim I-ja: Just think about it. They claimed they were conducting personnel vetting, but looking at candidates Kim Seung-won and Yong Hye-in, is personnel vetting even functioning at all? Going further, while pushing to abolish the Prosecutors' Office under the pretext of separating investigation and indictment, they have not even scouted candidates for the heads of the Public Prosecution Office and the Major Crimes Investigation Office. It is literally starting a train with the doors wide open. In addition, they are clashing heavily with Supreme Court Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae. The public is fatigued by these conflicts. That is what they are witnessing.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Yes.
 
▶ Lim I-ja: Meanwhile, grocery cart inflation is soaring. Items that go on our dinner tables—such as rice, beef, eggs, mackerel, and cutlassfish—are rising by 3% to 7%, so people feel grocery prices are unbearable. Amid high interest rates and high inflation, small business owners, the self-employed, and those carrying debt are saying they feel like they are truly pushed to the brink. They say the economy during the IMF crisis was also bad, but business owners who have been in business for decades say they have never seen an economy this bad before.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: That is how severe the economic downturn is?
 
▶ Lim I-ja: That is what they say.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Did they mention anything about the People Power Party?
 
▶ Lim I-ja: Of course they did. How could they not?
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: What did they say?
 
▶ Lim I-ja: They said, "Do a better job." Some asked, "Are you even fighting?" But those are voices from certain quarters. What most people broadly said was that even though the Democratic Party makes blunder after blunder and the Lee Jae-myung administration repeatedly mismanages state affairs, the People Power Party needs to pull itself together and step up as a viable alternative party. They said we must become an alternative party for the people and offer practical solutions, stating clearly what we intend to change. That was also the local sentiment I heard.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Representative, as the Policy Committee Chair, you are essentially the commander-in-chief of party policy.
 
▶ Lim I-ja: That is right.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Right? Then regarding that alternative demanded by voters—saying you need to win the next general election and the presidential election—you must already be preparing those alternatives, Representative.
 
▶ Lim I-ja: We are working extremely hard. I am exhausted to death.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: It seems politics really is a grueling job, isn't it?
 
▶ Lim I-ja: I was so tired that last night I even dreamed that I couldn't make it to Kim Tae-hyun's Political Show.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: That would have been trouble.
 
▶ Lim I-ja: Because I was so exhausted while sleeping.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Is that so? Representative, frankly speaking, what do you think would happen if a general election were held right away tomorrow?
 
▶ Lim I-ja: A general election won't happen right away, but...
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Hypothetically speaking.
 
▶ Lim I-ja: Hypothetically, what meaning does it have right now to predict who would take how many seats? Our only goal is to present better alternatives to the public as a superior party, gain the people's trust, and then truly win when the actual general election arrives.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: First, Chuseok has ended. With the regular parliamentary audit coming up, the second half of the National Assembly session is typically the opposition's time, right?
 
▶ Lim I-ja: That is correct.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Following Chuseok, what is the People Power Party's parliamentary strategy and stance toward the ruling camp?
 
▶ Lim I-ja: Looking at the Democratic Party today, they are already toying with a special counsel bill on alleged fabricated indictments. While they may have removed the provision on revoking indictments, isn't the bill itself fundamentally flawed? Then we naturally must confront it with a filibuster. That is practically the only tool the opposition party has. Not only filibusters, but we must also examine things thoroughly through the parliamentary audit, report our findings to the public, and if the Democratic Party continues to flex its majority, I believe we must even gather in Gwanghwamun.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: An off-floor rally?
 
▶ Lim I-ja: We must stage an off-floor struggle. That is my personal view.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Because there were reports that the party had already registered locations for weekend rallies.
 
▶ Lim I-ja: Where and how we appeal is not the main point. If there is an appeal we want to make regarding whether this government is truly one for the people and a true government of popular sovereignty, I believe the location is not what matters most.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Then, National Foundation Day on October 3 is just around the corner. Are you considering an off-floor rally? Is there simply not enough physical time?
 
▶ Lim I-ja: My personal opinion is that in the face of the Lee Jae-myung administration heading so excessively toward an authoritarian regime, I am among those who believe we must make our voices heard to the public.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: An off-floor struggle. That is your personal thought, as a unified party-wide consensus has not yet been formed, correct?
 
▶ Lim I-ja: That is correct.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: What about Representative Jang Dong-hyeok? Is he planning to continue visiting Olympic Park?
 
▶ Lim I-ja: I do not view Representative Jang Dong-hyeok's visits to Olympic Park as a bad thing. Citizens are also there at Olympic Park, raising their voices about having their suffrage infringed upon. Isn't that public sentiment too? Therefore, where else should an opposition leader go if not there? One cannot say it is wrong for an opposition leader to go there. However, as time goes on...
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Because he visits so frequently.
 
▶ Lim I-ja: As more missteps emerge over time, he is not just visiting Olympic Park. Recently, regarding platform workers who fall into the blind spots of labor laws, he has been pushing initiatives such as helping them establish mutual aid associations to protect their rights. He is actively carrying out various livelihood-focused activities.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: As the leader of the main opposition party, he certainly does many things. However, in media coverage, only his visits to Olympic Park and drumming get highlighted because he goes there so often. That image of drumming at Olympic Park seems disconnected from the public demand you mentioned earlier, where supporters during Chuseok asked the party to present viable alternatives.
 
▶ Lim I-ja: That is because people view it through that selective lens. We are doing a great deal right now. Yesterday, our party launched the Youth Policy Planning Committee. Initially, when we opened public recruitment, I worried what would happen if few applicants showed up, but about 243 people applied. We issued appointment certificates to 233 of them. Our approach is that youth policies should be designed and crafted directly by youth themselves. Our Policy Committee and our party will take those ideas, draft legislation, develop policies, and provide budgetary support where needed. We are building this up step by step.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: In your view, do you think Representative Jang Dong-hyeok is doing well these days?
 
▶ Lim I-ja: I believe he is continually reaching out toward the public. I understand that tomorrow, regarding the comprehensive farmland investigation, he plans to head to Chungju to listen to the voices of farmers and citizens. Today, he is visiting Baengnyeongdo.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Since you brought up the farmland investigation, your constituency is Sangju. There is a lot of agricultural land and many farmers living there. How is it? What has the reaction been like?
 
▶ Lim I-ja: It caused an absolute uproar. People are asking, "Are they now even trying to seize our farmland?" Regarding this comprehensive farmland investigation, if I were to describe this administration in one phrase, it is truly a government that 'departs with its doors open.' Instead of meticulously designing policies and then implementing them, they simply throw out ideas first. There are countless individual stories behind agricultural land. Some owners are elderly, some suffer from illnesses, and others acquired land through inheritance. Yet, without considering this, they just tossed out, "We will conduct a comprehensive farmland investigation." Under the rules, failure to meet the requirements results in an annual penalty surcharge of 25%. Farmers wonder, "Does that mean my land will be confiscated entirely in four years? What is this? Are we moving toward socialism?" Naturally, farmers can think that way.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Yes.
 
▶ Lim I-ja: That is why it needs thorough planning. Of course, speculation must be curbed. Speculation must be stopped, but they should review it sufficiently, investigate properly, reassure farmers, and single out only speculative acts. Instead, they just toss it out casually and say, "If not, whatever, we will grant a grace period." That is why farmers are furious.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Your point is that starting without proper planning is the problem.
 
▶ Lim I-ja: Exactly. And within that, there are so many complicated personal circumstances.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: For now, Minister Song Mi-ryung stated that customary leasing or fallow land due to inheritance, moving away from farming, or old age are not subject to disposal orders, and that strict measures will be taken only against speculative acts, such as acquiring farmland through false farming plans and leaving it neglected or illegally leasing it.
 
▶ Lim I-ja: The same applies to that explanation. The same goes for those who left farming. They should have designed the system clearly, explained each detail thoroughly, and then specified, "We will consider these specific cases as speculation." Initially, there was not even such an explanation. They just tossed it out, prompting farmers to react in anger, asking, "Does this mean my assets are being taken away?" Only when resistance broke out did they backtrack, saying, "This and that are excluded, and we will offer a grace period." Even regarding those criteria, farmers are currently viewing them with deep suspicion.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Understood. And today, Representative Jang is visiting Baengnyeongdo, you said.
 
▶ Lim I-ja: Yes.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Because of the military units there.
 
▶ Lim I-ja: That is right.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Regarding security, let's talk about the recent DMZ explosion incident. Looking at yesterday's announcement by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, they stated it is highly likely North Korea's doing.
 
▶ Lim I-ja: So they said.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: When the final findings come out, the probability that it will be announced as North Korea's doing is probably 99% given the current circumstances.
 
▶ Lim I-ja: Isn't it 100%? Anchor, think about it. If our military didn't go there and plant landmines, who else could have done it? Would Japan have crossed over to do it, or would the UN Command have planted them?
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: It is highly likely North Korea, as announced yesterday by the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
 
▶ Lim I-ja: But dragging their feet for six days—shouldn't they have acted quickly? Looking at this, many citizens have suspicious eyes.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: In what sense?
 
▶ Lim I-ja: Why didn't they investigate swiftly and properly? When it comes to uncovering the truth, back in 2015, they announced everything within six days when they set their minds to it.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Yes.
 
▶ Lim I-ja: But what was the reason for dragging their feet for six extra days? Why on earth did they do that? That is how the public views it. In a situation where our South Korean soldiers, our precious children, shed blood, such a delayed response is completely unacceptable. They must have known our military did not lay those mines. Then who did?
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: So if the final conclusion—the military's provisional conclusion is already pointing to North Korea—if the final conclusion attributes it to North Korea, talks of corresponding measures will emerge from within the military. What could those be?
 
▶ Lim I-ja: What would this administration even do? I am truly curious what Defense Minister Kang Shin-chul would do. Back in 2015, we at least resumed loudspeaker broadcasts toward North Korea to take some countermeasure, but now they have dismantled all that equipment. What could they possibly do? Will they just lodge a trivial protest through the UN Command and call it a day? What can this administration do? I believe nothing. That is why when it comes to the military, when it comes to national security and life-or-death matters for our people, relying on appeasement—whether it's the Sunshine Policy or whatever—we must protect our citizens and our soldiers, must we not? I believe we must confront this resolutely with real deterrence.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: So from the People Power Party's perspective, compared to 2015, you find the current administration's corresponding measures untrustworthy?
 
▶ Lim I-ja: Completely untrustworthy.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: In that case, what measures would the People Power Party take?
 
▶ Lim I-ja: We would have to take power to implement measures. Right now, our numbers in parliament are insufficient, so what would happen even if we proposed something? Still, in safeguarding South Korea's national security, we would firmly solidify the South Korea-U.S. alliance, and within that framework, I can say we need to adopt a more progressive approach regarding nuclear capabilities.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: What do you mean by a progressive approach regarding nuclear capabilities?
 
▶ Lim I-ja: Nuclear-powered submarines.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Understood. Let's touch upon this point. At a town hall meeting with ethnic Koreans in Mexico, the President said, "There is absolutely no chance my term will extend beyond June 2, 2030." Can this be considered a declaration that he will not seek reelection?
 
▶ Lim I-ja: Hasn't the People Power Party consistently demanded that he declare he will not pursue reelection? From that standpoint, one could say the minimum condition has been met, but it is not a sufficient condition. I don't know why he speaks in such complicated terms. For instance, people are talking about discussing constitutional reform right now. If so, pursue constitutional revision. Addressing basic rights, the power structure, or regional decentralization is fine. But if he claims he is an obstacle, why make it so convoluted when all he needs to do is say, "Include a supplementary provision in the revised Constitution stating that the incumbent president cannot serve consecutive or additional terms"? Whenever we look at President Lee Jae-myung's statements, justification and contradiction always coexist. Just as he once said, "When I said I respected them, they actually believed I respected them." His statements have almost zero credibility. So he could simply make it clear. Therefore, what he said may serve as a minimal starting point, but it is not a sufficient condition.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Then the People Power Party still has no plan to participate in constitutional revision talks?
 
▶ Lim I-ja: The President just needs to make it clear: "Fellow citizens, in amending this Constitution, make sure to rule out consecutive or additional terms for the incumbent president. Definitely nail that down in the supplementary provisions before starting." If he does that, the public and the National Assembly can certainly discuss it.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: You are saying the President should take one step further from here?
 
▶ Lim I-ja: I am not saying take a step further, but rather make it explicit.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Explicitly. Then you could participate in constitutional reform talks?
 
▶ Lim I-ja: Then certainly.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Understood. Also, there are reports that the President will order the formation of a special investigation headquarters for the insurrection case.
 
▶ Lim I-ja: The police said they have received no such orders. But citizens are expressing this sentiment: among my friends, many support our party, but there are also long-time traditional Democratic Party supporters. They say they are sick and tired of the insurrection issue alone. They say it's insurrection, insurrection, insurrection, insurrection over and over.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Fatigue?
 
▶ Lim I-ja: We had an insurrection special counsel, a comprehensive special counsel, and then their so-called Task Force for Innovation in Respect of the Constitution. On top of that, they are now proposing a special investigation team on insurrection, so citizens are reacting with, "This is too tedious, stop milking it."
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Understood. Regarding Supreme Court Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae mentioned earlier, the Legislation and Judiciary Committee adopted him as a witness for the parliamentary audit under the Democratic Party's lead. Watching Chief Justice Cho speak to reporters yesterday, his position seemed to be that he would appear at the audit and speak. What is the People Power Party's stance regarding the Chief Justice's appearance?
 
▶ Lim I-ja: Whether the Chief Justice appears or not is a matter for him to decide, isn't it? Based on yesterday's interview, it seems likely he will appear; he must have a lot to say. But regarding the recommendation and re-recommendation of Supreme Court Justices, it is very simple. Just follow the law.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: So for now, does the People Power Party oppose adopting him as a witness?
 
▶ Lim I-ja: We oppose it.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Why? If he appears and speaks, wouldn't that...
 
▶ Lim I-ja: It does not matter whether he speaks or not. Regarding the re-recommendation of Supreme Court Justices, whether the Chief Justice is selected as a witness by the National Assembly is not something for us to quibble over. If he comes and has things to say, he can say them, and if he chooses not to come, we cannot force him to appear either, can we?
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Yes.
 
▶ Lim I-ja: However, from the public's viewpoint, the Chief Justice recommends a Supreme Court Justice, and with the National Assembly's consent, the President appoints them. If the President dislikes a nominee, submitting the nomination to the National Assembly would naturally result in rejection, wouldn't it? But why don't they do that? And why do they demand a re-recommendation without presenting specific grounds or constitutional basis? As I see it, they worry that sending it to the National Assembly might cause breakaway votes from the ruling party, or perhaps the person recommended by the Chief Justice aligns well with public standards. In that case, they seem afraid people might question what the ruling party is doing. That is my speculation.
 
▷ Kim Tae-hyun: Understood. We will conclude our interview here today. That was Lim I-ja, Policy Committee Chair of the People Power Party. Thank you.
 
▶ Lim I-ja: Thank you.

The copyright of this interview material belongs to SBS Radio.
When republishing the full text or quoting this interview in reporting,
please state the channel and program name accurately as follows:

[SBS Kim Tae-hyun's Political Show]