Hearing Date for Injunction Against Broadcasting by the Three Terrestrial Broadcasters
Sim Sang-jung, the Justice Party's presidential candidate, is responding to reporters' questions while attending the hearing for the injunction to ban the two-party presidential candidate debate held at the Seoul Southern District Court in Yangcheon-gu, Seoul, on the 25th. Photo by the National Assembly Press Photographers Group
[Asia Economy Reporter Yoo Byung-don, Trainee Reporter Oh Gyu-min] Sim Sang-jung, the presidential candidate of the Justice Party, criticized the push for a two-candidate TV debate as a "clear illegal debate."
On the morning of the 25th, just before attending the hearing for the injunction to ban the broadcast by the three terrestrial broadcasters at the Seoul Southern District Court, Candidate Sim told reporters, "A two-candidate debate violates the principles of democracy by excluding the voices of minorities." He added, "It violates the Broadcasting Act, which guarantees the independence of broadcasting, and the Public Official Election Act, which ensures fair opportunities."
The legal representative of Candidate Sim, who appeared in court, also argued, "The two-candidate debate between Lee Jae-myung of the Democratic Party and Yoon Seok-youl of the People Power Party is essentially a collusion between the two parties and a 'made-to-order' debate." He claimed, "The three terrestrial broadcasters have abandoned their duty as public broadcasters by not providing debate opportunities to all candidates."
Afterward, Candidate Sim, who was granted the right to speak directly, said, "Pursuing a debate ordered by the two parties violates the Broadcasting Act, which stipulates the independence of broadcasting," and added, "If the two-candidate debate takes place this time, it will have a huge influence as it will be the first debate before the election."
He continued, "If conducted through collusion between the two parties, it is the tyranny of the majority that ignores minorities and a serious unfairness that undermines fair competition," adding, "The foundation of democracy is to respect majority rule while guaranteeing at least the right to speak so that minorities are not excluded."
In response, the legal representatives of the three terrestrial broadcasters submitted a written response before the hearing, stating, "Compared to the situation in 2007, there have been tremendous changes over 25 years. YouTube and new media have developed, and the influence of terrestrial broadcasting is different from before," and "The presidential election landscape then is different from now."
On the day, the representatives of the three terrestrial broadcasters rebutted, saying, "Two-candidate debates are invited by media organizations and, unlike election broadcast debates, do not have fixed attendance requirements," and "There are regulations allowing two-candidate debates among candidates who meet the criteria for the public's right to know and efficient debate."
They also stated, "This two-candidate debate is separate from the four-candidate invited debate, and if all candidates need to attend, a four-candidate invited debate will be considered at any time," and requested, "Please dismiss the injunction so that the 20th presidential election can proceed with the right to know guaranteed through debates among highly interested candidates."
After hearing both sides, the court concluded the hearing without any separate mention of the decision.
Earlier, Candidate Sim and Ahn Cheol-soo of the People’s Party opposed the push for a two-candidate debate by the Democratic Party and People Power Party on the three terrestrial broadcasters and each filed an injunction to ban the broadcast of presidential candidate invitation debates at the Seoul Southern District Court and Seoul Western District Court, respectively.
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
