[Reporter's Desk] Group Chat Deletion and Whistleblower Hunt Allegations... Is This the Democratic Party's Response?

The way an organization responds after an issue is raised reveals its true character. The case of the Democratic Party’s Boryeong regional committee in South Chungcheong Province clearly demonstrates how it handles criticism and internal problems.

It was recently revealed that Shin Hyunseong, Director of Civil Affairs at the Office for Government Policy Coordination, had been participating in a KakaoTalk group chat for Democratic Party members in Boryeong. This has sparked controversy over a potential violation of the political neutrality required by the National Public Service Act.

The Director of Civil Affairs is a key position at the Office for Government Policy Coordination, overseeing civil petitions, civil society, and public sector discipline. The mere fact that such an official remained connected to a political party’s regional organization for several months after appointment is, in itself, a serious matter.

However, the situation became even more concerning when, following a report by The Asia Business Daily, the group chat was abruptly deleted without any explanation.

Within local political circles, suspicions have arisen that the deletion process may have included attempts to identify the whistleblower. If true, this goes beyond mere political carelessness and can be seen as an effort to block internal whistleblowing and the raising of issues at their source.

If, instead of providing explanations and taking responsibility for the allegations raised within the ruling party’s regional organization, there were moves to erase potential evidence and track down the whistleblower, this would be fundamentally at odds with the basic principles of a democratic political party.

In situations where the person who exposes a problem should be protected, if the focus instead shifts to identifying who leaked the information, only fear and silence will remain.

Locally, politicians are openly saying, “The fact that the Director of Civil Affairs remained in the group chat is a problem in itself, but deleting the chat is even more serious,” and questioning, “Is this really what the Democratic Party stands for?”

This controversy over the Director of Civil Affairs, who is supposed to uphold political neutrality above all else, has also brought the organizational culture and sensitivity to power within the regional committee into question.

Shin has explained that there was “no political activity,” but the duty of political neutrality for public officials is not judged solely by their actions. Severing any structures or relationships that could cast doubt on one’s neutrality is fundamental.

This standard must be even stricter for the Director of Civil Affairs, who is responsible for oversight functions, than for ordinary public officials.

If this issue is swept under the rug with a personal explanation or by simply deleting the group chat, the problem will only grow. The moment the party is perceived as one that hunts for whistleblowers and erases traces of criticism, the moral legitimacy of the ruling party will be severely shaken.

Politics is an arena where power must be held accountable, not a space for eliminating uncomfortable questions. The Democratic Party must confront the essence of this issue. The more important question is not who was in the group chat, but why only silence, deletion, and suspicions of a witch hunt remain after the issue was raised.

If this truly represents how the ruling party that claims to champion democracy responds, the public will question more sharply and judge more strictly.