[Editorial] Can Independent Counsel Candidates Really Be Independent?

Why do we need an independent counsel?

The prosecution is armed with everything required for investigations: human resources, intelligence, experience and skills. But, in order to maintain fairness and objectivity in investigations into big political scandals. Therefore, an independent counsel must be someone who is not related to people involved in the scandal, and must be free of any "conflict of interest" speculations.

In this respect, the two lawyers recommended by the Korean Bar Association are not eligible to become a special counsel who is to look into the checkbook diplomacy scandal involving Kim Dae Jung himself. It does not mean that they are not competent as practicing attorneys. One of them was a director serving for a Foreign Exchange Bank, a major creditor of Hyundai Marine Merchant, the company lying at the core of the scandal. The other one worked for Hyundai Securities as a director. If either of them becomes part of the independent counsel and conducts the investigation, South Koreans may not buy the results the counsel will come up with at the end of the investigation.

A more serious matter is that one of the candidates works with the nephew of Kim Dae Jung at a law firm, a person who may be subject to prosecution. Both political parties haggled over the checkbook scandal even during the last presidential election. Nonetheless, the KBA recommended these "defective" lawyers to handle such an issue of political sensitivity. No wonder people say, "Something`s fishy."

We understand how hard it is for the KBA to find an appropriate candidate. It must have been tougher this time since the scandal involves the former administration, the chaebol, banks and even the North Korean regime. Even worse, since the prosecution "waived" its right to investigate this scandal, the independent counsel has to start from scratch. Thus, many lawyers reportedly declined the invitation of the KBA for the job. Nevertheless, it is so easy to find out their previous career histories. Their profiles are based on public information to which everyone has access. If the KBA had knowingly ignored the defects, we cannot help suspecting its sense of reality.

The KBA has officially announced that it would stick to its decision, alleging that "what really matters is the character and personality of the candidate." Its recommendation runs directly counter to the reason for appointing an independent counsel. The decision may backfire on the lawyers` body, and damage its reputation. Alternatively, the two recommended candidates could resign themselves. Otherwise, the KBA cannot avoid South Korean suspicions that the KBA is doing something to cover up the scandal. If this is the way it should be, why in the world do we need an independent counsel?