[Public Officials, Competency Verification Comes First] Jeong Seongho: "The Best Aces Must Be Able to Participate in National Administration"

Concerns Over "Talented Individuals Avoiding Public Office" and Background Check-Focused Hearings
Jeong Proposes Ruling and Opposition Negotiations to Reform Personnel Hearing System After Regular Session

Editor's NoteUtilizing talent in the right place is directly tied to the success or failure of national governance. The saying "personnel is everything" did not come about by chance. The problem is that, even when there is a desire to use talented individuals, it is difficult to do so in reality. Even when someone is identified and considered for an important role, it is common for the individual to decline. This is not unrelated to the fact that the very system established to vet public officials is now blocking the appointment of talent. It is problematic when personal background checks take precedence over competency assessments. With the current personnel hearing system, which focuses on scrutinizing not only the public official but also their spouse and children, it is inevitably difficult to appoint talented individuals. This series diagnoses the recurring problems of the personnel hearing system that arise with each new administration and seeks ways to improve it.

"If things continue this way, I believe the future of the nation will be in grave danger."

Jeong Seongho, a five-term lawmaker from the Democratic Party of Korea and regarded as a key aide to President Lee Jaemyung, expressed these concerns regarding the challenges surrounding personnel appointments as the new administration takes office. As a former head of the Democratic Party’s Talent Recruitment Committee, he is more interested in the appointment of talent than anyone else. He believes that both society and the political sphere must jointly contemplate this issue for the development of South Korea.

He points out that the current reality, where National Assembly personnel hearings focus more on personal background checks and finding faults rather than verifying capability and qualifications for high public office, is leading the nation’s best and brightest to avoid public service. He insists that this cannot be left unaddressed.

In an interview with Asia Economy at the National Assembly on June 17, Jeong Seongho suggested that after the formation of the first cabinet of the Lee Jaemyung administration is finalized, both ruling and opposition parties should seek alternatives to reform the personnel hearing system during this year’s regular session. Having served as the chair of the National Assembly’s personnel hearing committee, he is well aware of the realities and issues of the system and is naturally interested in alternatives for cooperative politics.

Jeong Seongho, a member of the Democratic Party of Korea, is being interviewed by Asia Economy at the National Assembly on the 17th. 2025.6.17 Photo by Kim Hyunmin

Jeong stated, "The world is changing even faster than it is deteriorating, so if new, creative, and outstanding talent does not enter public service, the nation will collapse," adding, "We must create opportunities for the most capable individuals to participate in government administration."

He emphasized that sensitive background checks involving personal matters should be conducted in closed subcommittees, and that it is necessary to overhaul the national talent management system and improve the political culture of both parties. In particular, Jeong said, "If the ruling and opposition parties engage in sincere dialogue, change is possible," and expressed his willingness to personally negotiate with the opposition if given the opportunity. The following is a Q&A with Jeong Seongho.

-You served as the head of the Democratic Party’s Talent Recruitment Committee and were responsible for appointing talent. How do you assess the current situation regarding the recruitment of public officials?

▲In the case of political appointees, I believe there are problems with the talent recruitment system. The need to recruit experts in specialized fields has increased, but compared to the private sector, compensation and working conditions are poor. The government should be given more discretion regarding compensation and working conditions. For key political positions such as ministers, personnel hearings are required, but these focus more on background checks than on assessing suitability. As background checks have become stricter than in the past, the ruling party tries to protect its nominees from a partisan standpoint, while the opposition focuses solely on embarrassing them. As a result, truly needed talent is reluctant to enter public service.

The government’s vetting system also needs improvement. There are agencies such as the police, prosecution, National Intelligence Service, and National Tax Service that gather personnel-related information, but there should be a system to collect and manage this information securely, which currently does not exist. Former President Kim Dae-jung introduced and utilized a national talent database, but even this DB is biased toward graduates of Seoul National University and men. Furthermore, information on talent from independent bodies such as the legislature or judiciary, or from political parties, is lacking. Due to these limitations, when administrations change, recommendations are made internally within the party. This leads to issues such as favoritism and revolving-door appointments. As these problems repeat, it only wastes national resources and accelerates extreme political division. Since personnel issues in government and political parties are a major cause of political polarization and the squandering of national resources, it is necessary to reestablish the personnel system to select high-quality talent.

-You have chaired numerous personnel hearings as a five-term lawmaker. What are your thoughts?

▲When National Assembly personnel hearings were introduced during former President Kim Dae-jung’s administration, the goal was to respect the opposition and conduct prior vetting. This allowed those seeking high office to manage themselves better, which was a positive development. However, as the focus gradually shifted to family members, especially children, and to background checks, capable individuals have begun to avoid public service. For example, when former President Yoon Suk-yeol was nominated as Prosecutor General and underwent a personnel hearing, there were issues raised about his spouse’s alleged involvement in the Deutsche Motors stock manipulation case and sponsorship funds for Covana Contents. The People Power Party raised these issues, but we tried to cover them up. What was the outcome? Because the personnel hearing system was operated in a partisan manner, these problems occurred.

Jeong Seongho, a member of the Democratic Party of Korea, is being interviewed by Asia Economy at the National Assembly on the 17th. 2025.6.17 Photo by Kim Hyunmin

-You proposed bills in the 20th and 21st National Assembly to conduct background checks in closed subcommittees. What was the intention?

▲When background checks and policy competency assessments are conducted together in personnel hearings, the focus shifts to background checks rather than verifying qualifications. Because of the strict moral standards, even capable individuals are reluctant to enter public service, which is a serious problem. I proposed that personal matters related to background checks be handled in closed sessions, while public vetting should focus only on policy competency and suitability. If personnel hearings focus solely on background checks, the nominee is branded for life. Someone who has lived a decent life and maintained a good reputation is suddenly criticized for hypocrisy. If the system is improved to allow closed sessions, the nominee can simply withdraw if there is a problem, reducing fear. This would increase the number of people willing to enter public service. However, system improvement alone is not enough. The president’s willingness to appoint talent broadly, regardless of political affiliation, is crucial. The extreme confrontation between the government and the legislature must be eased, and there must be dialogue and compromise between the ruling and opposition parties. Even if there are some issues, there should be a culture that recognizes policy competency if it exists.

-There have been discussions about reforming the personnel hearing system in the past, but little progress has been made. Why?

▲There will be a series of personnel hearings for the Prime Minister, ministers, and heads of agencies. Discussing system reform at this time may be seen as politically motivated, making it difficult. After the regular session ends, the ruling and opposition parties should hold discussions. It should be possible to appoint figures from the opposition as well. If both sides assume that they could one day switch places, consensus is possible. The ruling and opposition parties can sincerely agree to reform the system to select good talent for the country. However, this must never be unilaterally decided simply because we are the majority party. If the Democratic Party tries to appoint unqualified individuals unilaterally, it will be misunderstood, so consensus between the parties is necessary. I believe consensus is possible. Democracy is about the possibility of a change in power. If I or anyone else is entrusted with negotiations, I believe we can persuade the opposition and reach an agreement.

-Can some moral flaws be tolerated?

▲If past mistakes are forgivable, the public should be asked for understanding. If a person is truly competent, there must be bipartisan agreement. If there are issues but the person is the best fit and recognized globally, that is what politics is about?allowing for exceptions. If someone is talented and willing to serve the country, they should be allowed to do so. Ultimately, personnel is everything, and appointing capable people determines the nation’s future. Also, it is wrong to stigmatize a highly competent person just because they participated in a committee during the previous administration. The president and those in power should focus on ability and pursue balanced appointments. The will to appoint widely, beyond factional logic, is extremely important.

-There is controversy over "holdover appointments" regarding heads of public institutions. How should this be resolved?

▲In the United States, except for heads of independent agencies whose terms are strictly set by law, most serve terms that coincide with the president. We should also change our system. Government administration is not carried out solely by ministries. For major government policies, public institutions must also align with the president’s philosophy. If someone who does not share the national policy goals heads a subordinate agency, that is a problem. Therefore, this must be addressed through bipartisan agreement with the nation’s future in mind.

-Ultimately, it is the legislature that oversees personnel hearings. What standards should the legislature uphold?

▲The primary purpose of the personnel hearing system is to verify expertise, qualifications, and capability in the relevant field. The second most important thing is to confirm, through their life history, whether the nominee has a sense of responsibility for the public and loyalty to the people. For example, if there are issues with the accumulation of wealth, even if it is not illegal, that could be problematic. After that, background checks should also be conducted.

Seongho Jeong, a member of the Democratic Party of Korea, is being interviewed by Asia Economy at the National Assembly on the 17th. 2025.6.17 Photo by Hyunmin Kim

<Who is Jeong Seongho, Democratic Party lawmaker?>

A phrase that symbolically represents Jeong Seongho, a Democratic Party lawmaker, is that he has received the Baekbong Gentleman’s Award four times. Selected by political journalists from major news outlets, the Baekbong Gentleman’s Award recognizes not only ability and qualifications but also a sense of political balance among ruling and opposition politicians. It is awarded to identify the true "parliamentarian" and "democrat" among politicians from both sides of the aisle.

In a reality where political confrontation is intensifying, respecting the value of compromise is not as easy as it sounds. There is always the risk of criticism from one’s support base. Politics that rely on hardline supporters make it difficult to expect a culture of dialogue and compromise. Jeong is someone who has walked a difficult path. He has continuously engaged in dialogue and debate, striving to earn the agreement and understanding of the opposing party. For this reason, during his five terms as a National Assembly member, he has built many political alliances. Not only within his own party but also among rival parties, he is recognized as "someone you can talk to."

Born in 1961 in Yanggu, Gangwon Province, he graduated from Seoul National University School of Law and passed the bar exam (18th Judicial Research and Training Institute). As a classmate of President Lee Jaemyung at the Judicial Research and Training Institute, he has maintained a long-standing relationship. He is one of the key advisors to President Lee when major political decisions are made. Politician Jeong Seongho is known as the leader of the so-called pro-Lee faction. Since being elected in the 17th general election in 2004, he has served five terms as a National Assembly member.

Jeong has always been a strong supporter and advisor to President Lee at critical political moments. He has also played the role of "red team," offering candid advice to the president.

Since the launch of the Lee Jaemyung administration, his political stature has grown even further. As a trusted confidant of President Lee and someone who can engage in dialogue with the opposition, including the People Power Party, there is growing interest in what role he will play in the future.