[Reporter’s Notebook] Ruling and Opposition Parties Must Join Forces for 'Audit Reform'

"The worst ever, an F grade." This is the general assessment of this year's National Assembly audit.

From the very beginning, lawmakers exchanged insults and vulgar language reminiscent of outdated movies, such as "pathetic XX" and "come up to the roof." By the end, there was even a shoving incident more suited to professional wrestling. Instead of policy inquiries, only provocative remarks remain, repeatedly circulated as YouTube videos. The National Assembly audit, one of the achievements of democratization reclaimed with difficulty by citizens in June 1987 who demanded "abolish the constitutional order, end dictatorship, achieve democracy," has once again ended in political strife this year.

According to the National Assembly Bill Information System and the Citizens' Coalition for Economic Justice, 12 out of 17 standing committees (70.6%) adopted audit result reports in 2019, but this dropped to 6 committees (35.3%) in 2023.

The reality is that the government and public institutions view the audit as just "a day to get scolded." After the 2023 audit, only 130 out of 793 audited institutions (16.4%) submitted follow-up reports on corrective actions. This attitude even became the spark for the Cambodia incident. During last year's audit, Kim Sunghoon and Kim Gun, lawmakers from the People Power Party, then the ruling party, demanded special measures regarding the Cambodia kidnapping and detention incident, but the government failed to follow up with improvements, and ultimately the incident could not be prevented.

This kind of audit can no longer be neglected. Civic groups and academia are suggesting alternatives such as the cases of the United Kingdom and Japan, which have strengthened year-round oversight functions, or the United States' Government Accountability Office (GAO), a congressional information and investigative agency that regularly checks on government corrective actions.

It has become customary for lawmakers to propose amendments to include year-round audit provisions every time a new National Assembly is inaugurated, saying, "Let's fix the last-minute audit approach and strengthen oversight." However, such proposals repeatedly get scrapped without even reaching the plenary session, facing counterarguments such as "There aren't enough personnel to establish a permanent oversight body within the National Assembly, and its functions would overlap with the Board of Audit and Inspection," or "The circumstances are different from parliamentary systems like the UK and Japan, and the workload for lawmakers and their aides would become excessive."

These may sound like reasonable objections, but aren't they really just excuses? Regardless of the field-politics, economy, or society-lawmakers are elected to solve the nation's problems through legislative authority. To quote National Assembly Speaker Woo Wonshik, "Attitude is leadership." The ruling and opposition parties must come together to create a better model for Korea's National Assembly audit.

How shameful is it that the audit received a failing grade less than a year after the people defended the National Assembly-the sanctuary of democracy-against martial law forces? Lawmakers must approach their duties with a desperate determination to break the chain of pessimism surrounding the audit's effectiveness. That is the proper respect owed to the people who empowered the National Assembly.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.