Go to contents

Former NIS chief dismisses the allegation of deleting intelligence

Former NIS chief dismisses the allegation of deleting intelligence

Posted July. 08, 2022 07:53,   

Updated July. 08, 2022 07:53


“Even if I redact something, it will still be traced back on the NIS servers. Why would I make such a stupid mistake?” said Park Jie-won, former director of the National Intelligence Service. He has been accused by the agency of illegally deleting the data on the fisheries official killed in the Yellow Sea.

“The NIS does not generate all the information or the Special Intelligence documents. They only share them,” said Mr. Park during an interview with CBS radio on Thursday morning. “Even if I delete something, the other (generators of intelligence) still has it. Why would do something so stupid?” “And even if I deleted data, the record of redaction would have been left in the servers of shard document,” he added, claiming that any use of personal computers at the NIS means an instant connection to the server. Regarding the possibility of reacting the source data in the shared document servers, Park said, “Even if documents are deleted in the shared servers, they will remain in the main server.”

About the allegation that the former NIS chief silenced the staff members who were ordered to make the redactions, Park summarily denied, labeling it as “the old-fashioned NIS political scheme.” “The NIS has been now reformed, and our staff will never do such things,” Park claimed. “I have been told that some of the old NIS employees have come back. They must have made such a silly accusation because they are still caught up in the old habits.” He also argued that the new NIS director, who was appointed only a month ago, is turning the NIS into the center of controversies.

“The NIS faces thorough inspections and investigations, and former directors or employees cannot be an exception for such scrutiny,” said Park. “It is a misstep of legality that they reported this case to the prosecution without telling me first, and it is also a mistake of courtesy towards a former director of the agency.”