Go to contents

Roh’s Pardon List Angers Ruling Party

Posted August. 10, 2006 05:29,   

한국어

An air of delicate tension is being formed between Cheong Wa Dae and the Uri Party as the list of people to be the targets of Liberation Day (August 15) Special Pardon is being unveiled.

It was reported that the "pardons for the chairs of large corporations and other businessmen" that the Chairman of Uri Party Kim Geun-tae had pushed for as a part of the "economic revitalization and business-friendly policies" would be excluded this time, and this provoked the Uri Party.

The party officials expressed their anger, saying, "The party only learned about the pardon list this year only after it was reported by the press. And they`ve decided to leave out the pardons for economic actors that we had been stressing. How can Cheong Wa Dae neglect the party in both process and the results?

One of the officials of the ruling party, while talking on phone with a journalist on August 9, said, "The standards upon which the selection of politicians to be pardoned this year and the list of those selected were directly affirmed and notified to the Ministry of Justice by Cheong Wa Dae. The Uri Party was left out of the discussion process."

By this comment he suggested that it was understandable why the Uri Party is so angry looking at the decision process.

At the meeting of emergency committee, which took place at the headquarters of the Uri Party in Yeongdeungpo, Seoul, Chairman Kim said, "I had made a recommendation to Cheong Wa Dae to pardon the entrepreneurs." By this he expressed his regret toward the fact that his recommendation was turned down.

A close associate of Chairman Kim revealed his discontent, saying, “Because the right to give pardons is entirely the authority of the president himself, all the party can do is to present its view and emphasize the requests. But couldn`t Cheong Wa Dae have taken into account the requests from the party?"

The Uri Party is stressing the fact that this exclusion of entrepreneurs from the pardon list will act as a brake to the business-friendly policy started by the party as a regret on the total failure in the May 31 local elections and the July 26 by-elections for assemblymen.

While some point out that Cheong Wa Dae is turning away from practical thoughts to stick to its identity, others are also revealing their antipathy that such moves will only isolate the president if continued.

For this reason, some also predict that the discords between the ruling party and Cheong Wa Dae will swell up again at the end of a remedy won after being triggered by the rumors about the designation of the former Presidential Secretary for Petition Mun Jae-in as the Minister of Justice.

Cheong Wa Dae is keeping silent about the pardon issues. About the Chairman Kim’s announcement that he will make efforts for pardons of businessmen including presidents of large corporations, the president said to Kim during the luncheon meeting with the party leadership on August 6, “How can you say so without any discussion with me when the pardon is solely the authority of the president?" Seeing the fact, it seems unlikely that Cheong Wa Dae will accommodate the discontent of the ruling party.

The standpoint of the Uri Party on the pardons and the reinstatement of rights for close associates of the president including Ahn Hee-jeong is that "the Party had not once made any recommendations to Cheong Wa Dae concerning the pardons for politicians official or unofficial" (spokesman Woo Sang-ho). But some people commented that such comments are only an evasion of responsibility to avoid criticisms from the opposition parties, considering that 386-generation ruling party representatives had actively made continual requests for mercy for Ahn and former lawmaker Shin Gye-ryun.

The opposition parties such as Grand National Party, Democratic Party and Democratic Labor Party harshly criticized Cheong Wa Dae`s scheme to pardon the close political allies of the president and reinstate their rights, saying, “It brings out into the light the lack of morality of this regime.”



jin0619@donga.com