The People Power Party decided to propose the ‘Emergency Martial Law Special Prosecution Act’, which removes suspicions of President Yoon Seok-yeol’s violation of foreign exchange crimes and charges of propaganda and instigation of civil war from the scope of investigation of the second ‘Seok-yeol Yoon Insurrection Special Prosecution Act’ proposed by the six opposition parties, including the Democratic Party of Korea. In a re-vote at the National Assembly on the 8th, the Insurrection Special Prosecution Act was rejected and abolished, but after 6 withdrawal votes were received, efforts were made to prevent further withdrawal. In response, the Democratic Party put pressure on the issue, saying, “We need to start discussions by issuing actual legislation, not just words.” While the ruling party plans to engage in negotiations if the Special Prosecution Act is proposed, the Democratic Party has made it clear that it will submit the bill to a vote at the plenary session of the National Assembly on the 16th, as originally announced.
People Power Party floor leader Kwon Seong-dong held a press conference at the National Assembly on the afternoon of the 14th and said, “We can never accept the Democratic Party’s anti-constitutional insurrection special prosecution law,” and “We will propose our own emergency martial law special prosecution law that removes unconstitutional elements.” Next, Floor Leader Kwon said, “If the Democratic Party refuses to negotiate with our party and pushes ahead with the Special Prosecution Act, I will request Acting President Choi Sang-mok, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Strategy and Finance, to exercise his right to request reconsideration (veto).” The Martial Law Special Prosecution Act is expected to be proposed as early as the 15th.
People Power Party Legal Advisory Committee Chairman Joo Jin-woo said, “Insurrection propaganda and incitement crimes that can be investigated against the general public should be excluded from the investigation,” and added, “All foreign exchange crimes that are directly related to North Korea and security policies have also been excluded from the investigation.” Compared to the Insurrection Special Prosecutor Act, the Martial Law Special Prosecutor Act limits the scope of investigation to specific acts that occurred from the declaration of martial law to the lifting of martial law, such as acts that attempted to substantially paralyze the functions of the National Assembly and the National Election Commission during the time of martial law, participation in and commanding a civil war, and charges of prior conspiracy. . The cognitive investigation provisions and the Democratic Party’s complaint case were also removed from the investigation target. The investigation period and number of people under the Insurrection Special Prosecutor Act are 150 days and 155 people, respectively, but under the Martial Law Special Prosecutor Act, the maximum period is 110 days and 68 people.
In particular, the ruling party linked the suspension of execution of the second arrest warrant for President Yoon by the Mutual Aid Investigation Headquarters, including the High-ranking Public Officials Crime Investigation Office (Corruption Investigation Office), with the processing of the special prosecution bill. Floor Leader Kwon said, “Since the government has announced its intention to investigate the President through a special prosecution, the Corruption Investigation Office must immediately stop investigating or attempting to arrest the President until the Special Investigations Act is drafted and passed through the National Assembly.”
The fact that the ruling party presented its own special prosecution bill 42 days after the December 3 martial law incident is interpreted as taking into account the growing public opinion in favor of the special prosecution law, especially among the pro-Han Dong-hoon circles. Floor leader Kwon said, “At the time of the first special prosecution law, there was a crackdown on votes, but 6 votes were lost. “There is a realistic problem that the Special Prosecutor Act submitted by the Democratic Party will be passed if two more votes are received, so we submitted our own bill,” he said. Even if Acting President Choi exercises his right to veto the Insurrection Special Prosecution Act again, the Insurrection Special Prosecution Act will be passed if there are more than 8 votes in favor within the ruling party in a re-vote at the National Assembly.
Park Seong-joon, senior deputy floor leader of the Democratic Party, met with reporters on this day and said, “If the People Power Party is sincere, they should submit a bill and engage in negotiations.” He added, “Since it looks like the arrest warrant for President Yoon will be executed, isn’t this a strategy to delay it under the pretext of negotiating with the special prosecutor?” He said.
The opposition party’s position is that it is possible to fully discuss issues such as excluding foreign exchange crimes, which the ruling party opposes, from investigation. A leadership official said in a phone call that day, “We will engage in negotiations with a flexible attitude regarding the content claimed by the People Power Party,” and “since the start of a special investigation is important, we can make concessions on foreign exchange crimes.”
However, if an agreement is not reached with the ruling party, it is known that an amendment reflecting at least some of the agreed upon content will be submitted to the plenary session on the 16th for processing. A key Democratic Party official said, “We will never respond to time-consuming tactics.”
Reporter Kwon Gu-yong [email protected]
Reporter Dabin Yoon [email protected]
-
- great
- 0dog
-
- I’m sad
- 0dog
-
- I’m angry
- 0dog