Kim Min-seok's confirmation hearing ends in disarray

 

Prime minister nominee Kim Min-seok poses for a commemorative photo with Democratic Party Rep. Park Sun-won and others in the National Assembly’s main chamber on June 26, where President Lee Jae Myung delivered a policy speech on the supplementary budget. [JOINT PRESS CORPS]

 
The National Assembly confirmation hearing for prime minister nominee Kim Min-seok ended in disarray without resolving the many allegations raised against him. Questions surrounding his personal wealth and financial transparency remained largely unanswered. While part of the blame lies with the opposition’s lack of preparation, a greater share rests with the nominee himself, who failed to submit key documents, and with the ruling Democratic Party (DP), which shielded him from scrutiny.
 
For the first time since the confirmation hearing system was introduced in 2000, not a single witness or expert was called to testify during a prime ministerial hearing. As the ruling party rejected all witness requests and the nominee declined to disclose key financial records, opposition lawmakers walked out in protest, prompting the hearing to collapse.
 
Following the disruption, Kim expressed regret, saying that while he had fulfilled his public duties amid personal hardships, he was sorry for falling short of public expectations. However, such a formal apology appeared insincere. What the public expected was transparency — a voluntary disclosure of information and proof that he met the ethical standards required of the nation’s second-highest office.
 

Related Article

• Prime minister nominee urged to fully address allegations with transparency

• Prime minister nominee denies illegal political funding allegations

• Prime minister nominee to meet with food industry leaders over soaring prices

Instead, Kim and ruling party lawmakers deflected criticism by focusing on a social media post from Rep. Joo Jin-woo of the People Power Party (PPP). Joo had claimed that Kim had stashed 600 million won ($442,900) in cash in his wardrobe. The ruling party seized on the comment, calling it a smear campaign akin to the “luxury watch in a rice paddy” allegation during the 2009 investigation of former President Roh Moo-hyun.
 
The PPP criticized the hearing as having revealed little beyond questionable claims about a lucrative cabbage farming investment and an ambiguous 200 million won gift from Kim’s mother-in-law. They also pointed out Kim’s confusion over Korea’s national debt ratio, raising further doubts about his qualifications.
 
Despite this, the DP has hinted that it may use its parliamentary majority to unilaterally pass Kim’s nomination. While the party has the numbers to do so, disregarding opposition concerns for other Cabinet nominees would undermine public trust. The government should not rely on its supermajority to rush through flawed appointments. Instead, it must commit to meaningful vetting that aligns with public expectations.
 
Past administrations have suffered political fallout after pushing through controversial nominations early in their terms. Missed opportunities to dismiss problematic figures often became long-term burdens. President Lee Jae Myung’s administration is already under scrutiny following the withdrawal of Oh Kwang-soo as senior presidential secretary for civil affairs over alleged real estate misconduct.
 

People Power Party floor leader Song Eon-seok and fellow lawmakers chant slogans at the National Assembly’s Special Committee on Budget and Accounts chamber in Yeouido, Seoul, on June 26, calling for the withdrawal of prime minister nominee Kim Min-seok. [YONHAP]

 
Foreign minister nominee Cho Hyun is also facing backlash after his spouse allegedly earned over 1 billion won in profit from a land deal in a redevelopment zone. As the president continues to shape his Cabinet, public scrutiny is only expected to intensify.
 
President Lee and the DP must act with decisiveness. If credible allegations arise, they must explain the facts to the public and replace nominees when necessary. Ignoring the public's concerns or showing arrogance by relying on a parliamentary majority could quickly erode political capital, repeating the mistakes of past administrations.


Translated from the JoongAng Ilbo using generative AI and edited by Korea JoongAng Daily staff.