Opposition's Ahn Gyu-baek, Former Steering Committee Chair, "Emergency Committee's Decision to Maintain 'Party Charter Article 80, Clause 1' Is Quite Regrettable"

Expressing Opposition to the Decision of the Emergency Committee
The Compromise in Clause 3 Is "a Plan Made with Greater Difficulty"

[Image source=Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Park Jun-yi] The Emergency Committee of the Democratic Party of Korea decided on the 17th to maintain Article 80, Paragraph 1 of the party constitution, which had sparked controversy, without any amendments. In response, Ahn Gyu-baek, Chair of the Democratic Party’s Convention Preparation Committee, expressed regret and opposition. The previous day, the Convention Preparation Committee had resolved to amend the provision after discussions.

Chair Ahn said in a phone interview with Asia Economy, "I am quite regretful," adding, "We made the decision after carefully considering the party’s various circumstances in a comprehensive manner, so I find it very regrettable that the Emergency Committee overturned that decision."

On the same day, the Emergency Committee held a meeting and decided to keep Article 80, Paragraph 1 of the party constitution as is, which suspends party positions upon indictment related to corruption cases.

Regarding the Emergency Committee’s decision to change the authority to cancel or suspend disciplinary actions in cases recognized as political oppression or other unfair reasons from the 'Central Party Ethics Tribunal' to the 'Party Affairs Committee' in Article 80, Paragraph 3, Chair Ahn criticized it as "a more difficult proposal to establish."

He explained, "The Emergency Committee contacted me just before making that decision."

In response to criticism from party lawmakers that the review process was too brief, he rebutted, "We started discussions around July 20 and have been deliberating for nearly a month, so saying the deliberation process was short is nonsense," adding, "The issue has been highlighted in the media and has been a point of contention, so perhaps they just weren’t interested."

Regarding the criticism that this was the so-called 'Lee Jae-myung Shield Law,' he explained, "This was not about one or two specific individuals but a discussion about the party’s future," adding, "Since the party may face turmoil ahead and could lose stability, amendments are necessary."