Will the "Conflict of Interest Prevention Act" Succeed This Time?

The Democratic Party Drives Conflict of Interest Prevention Law Centered on Park Deok-heum
Ha Tae-kyung Says "At Least the Party Leader Should Apologize" Regarding the Park Deok-heum Incident

[Asia Economy Reporter Kang Nahum] As cases of conflicts of interest among members of the National Assembly continue to emerge, demands for the enactment of the 'Conflict of Interest Prevention Act' are also increasing. Attention is focused on whether this law, which failed to be enacted in the 19th and 20th National Assembly, can be finalized in the current National Assembly.

On the 22nd, Jin Seong-jun, a member of the Democratic Party of Korea, held a press conference and criticized Park Deok-heum of the People Power Party, who is suspected of winning construction contracts worth hundreds of billions of won from supervised institutions, saying, "(His explanation) does not add up" and "He is unqualified as a member of the National Assembly."

[Image source=Yonhap News]

He pointed out, "Conflicts of interest must be actively avoided. Park pretends not to know this. If he holds related stocks, he cannot participate in the Planning and Finance Committee or the Land, Infrastructure and Transport Committee, yet he has been confidently carrying out activities in the Land, Infrastructure and Transport Committee, benefiting not only his own company but also the industry," emphasizing the necessity of the Conflict of Interest Prevention Act.

Park, who held a press conference the day before, completely denied the allegations recently raised against him, but the general assessment is that he failed to gain enough persuasive power to quell the demands for the enactment of the Conflict of Interest Prevention Act.

The ruling party, which is raising the level of criticism against Park, is not free from conflict of interest controversies either. Yoon Young-chan, a former Naver executive and Democratic Party member, recently became embroiled in a power abuse controversy over Kakao's news editing, and Kim Hong-gul faced conflict of interest controversies for holding stocks classified as 'inter-Korean economic cooperation theme stocks.'

However, the ruling party is increasing the justification for processing the Conflict of Interest Prevention Act by expelling Kim Hong-gul, who was suspected of real estate speculation, and showing disciplinary intentions toward Lee Sang-jik, founder of Eastar Jet, who was embroiled in mass layoffs controversy, thereby managing internal risks.

[Image source=Yonhap News]

Within the People Power Party, public opinion on the Conflict of Interest Prevention Act is not that negative. Joo Ho-young, floor leader of the People Power Party, previously told reporters, "(The Conflict of Interest Prevention Act) is something I have advocated for a long time. Institutionalization discussions are possible in the future."

On the same day, Ha Tae-kyung, a member of the People Power Party, said on a radio show regarding the Park incident, "At least the party leader should apologize for the Park incident." He added, "The confirmed fact is that a person engaged in construction was on the Land, Infrastructure and Transport Committee for five years and also served as a floor leader. This was assigned by the party. It is hard for the public to accept."

Although the ruling and opposition parties have formed some consensus, it is uncertain whether it will lead to actual legislation. This is because it is difficult to define the scope of conflicts of interest and to resolve the interests of each issue and member. In fact, when the Kim Young-ran Act was enacted in 2015, a 'conflict of interest prevention clause' was included but was deleted after Democratic Party member Kim Ki-sik raised concerns about its feasibility. Also, the 'Public Officials Conflict of Interest Prevention Act' proposed by the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission in January went through Cabinet approval but was never discussed in the National Assembly. Six bills on the Conflict of Interest Prevention Act were proposed in the 20th National Assembly but were ultimately discarded.