Pre-screening questionnaire issued for nominees for top posts

A pre-screening questionnaire for nominees for high-ranking government posts that the presidential office uses for advance review is called a “general examination of their ethics.”

The questionnaire includes questions on a variety of topics about the applicants, including real estate speculation, tax evasion, fabricated registration of addresses, plagiarism and compulsory military service, that are considered frequent grounds for their failure to pass confirmation hearings.

After Cheon Seong-gwan was disqualified in his confirmation hearing to be prosecutor-general, the Lee Myung-bak administration in July 2010 prepared a questionnaire on 157 matters designed for self-examination by candidates ahead of nomination. After three nominees, including Kim Tae-ho as prime minister, failed to pass confirmation hearings for a Cabinet reshuffle on Aug. 8, 2010, the presidential office added 43 questions to the questionnaire.

For instance, the question, “Have you ever had the cumulative sum of credit and debit card and cash purchases by you, your spouse and children amounting to less than 10 percent of your annual income over the past five years?” reflects the case of prime minister nominee Kim. He marked “zero” as the amount of deduction for credit card purchases in his tax returns from 2006 to 2009, causing suspicion that he might have avoided reporting his expenditures possibly because he had income sources other than his salary as governor of South Gyeongsang Province.

Among the 200 questions in nine categories, questions on how one`s wealth was amassed are the most common (40), followed by those on work ethic (33), privacy (31), and tax obligations (26). Also asked are questions on issues that could anger the public, including those on possession of luxury memberships such as for golf clubs; hobbies that could raise controversy over eligibility as a ranking government official; experience of having lavish weddings for children at luxury hotels; and VIP membership at department stores or five-star hotels.

The questionnaire is limited in that it cannot thoroughly examine a candidate in advance because he or she is asked to answer “yes” or “no.” If a candidate marks “no” to a question from the beginning, detecting problems with his or her qualifications is difficult. Experts suggest that ordinary people in addition to public servants should habitually check themselves with the questionnaire for eligibility review.

scud2007@donga.com