Multiple interpretations are emerging in politics over why the Democratic Party of Korea does not prefer a third-party nomination method in talks on a "Unification Church special counsel." Analysts say structural distrust of the judiciary, accumulated trauma from past special counsels within the party, and the current leadership's political interests are interacting in complex ways.
Talks between the ruling and opposition parties over the "Unification Church Special Counsel Act" to investigate allegations that the Unification Church provided money to politicians are picking up speed. The Democratic Party of Korea and the People Power Party each introduced a special counsel bill and are set to enter full negotiations over the scope of the investigation and how to nominate the special counsel. The People Power Party, together with the Reform Party, introduced the Unification Church special counsel bill on the afternoon of the 23rd.
The biggest sticking point is whether the Democratic Party will accept a "third-party nomination method." Of the 16 special counsels to date, the Korean Bar Association exercised nomination rights six times, and the chief justice made recommendations four times. Since the Lee Myung-bak administration's "Naegok-dong private residence site purchase allegations" special counsel, it has effectively become customary for political circles to exercise nomination rights.
By contrast, the People Power Party and the Reform Party put the third-party nomination method at the forefront in this Unification Church special counsel. Under the bill introduced that day, the head of the National Court Administration recommends two candidates, and the president appoints one of them. People Power Party senior deputy floor spokesperson Gwak Gyu-taek said, "Because the special counsel will have to investigate political figures, it is not appropriate for the political sphere, whether the ruling or opposition party, to be involved in selecting the special counsel."
The Democratic Party, on the other hand, is sticking to a method in which the ruling and opposition parties each recommend one candidate for special counsel, instead of a third-party nomination. The main reason for the party's reluctance toward third-party nomination is the perception that there is "no institution trustworthy enough to entrust the task to." There is strong sentiment that recommendations by the Supreme Court or the National Court Administration, as proposed by the opposition, are unacceptable.
Since the Supreme Court's remand ruling related to President Lee Jae-myung, the Democratic Party has openly expressed distrust of the judiciary, including Chief Justice Jo Hee-de. Some within the party are even raising the possibility of impeachment, questioning the Supreme Court's political neutrality. In this situation, the party says it is difficult to accept a structure in which the judiciary is involved in recommending special counsel candidates.
Within the Democratic Party, recommendations by the Korean Bar Association are also largely considered "off the table." Behind this is the memory of the 2018 "Druking comment manipulation case" special counsel. At the time, the Bar Association recommended four candidates, the three opposition negotiation blocs narrowed them down to two, and the president appointed one. The Democratic Party accepted the introduction of a special counsel under public pressure, but the investigation ultimately ended with the detention of Kim Kyeong-soo, then the Gyeongsangnam-do governor and a key ruling bloc figure. A Democratic Party official said, "Since the Druking special counsel, a mood has solidified within the party that a 'third-party nominated special counsel can go in any direction.'"
Tensions between Floor Leader Kim Byung-kee, who is leading the special counsel talks, and an executive of the Korean Bar Association are also a factor. Kim has recently been at odds with a Bar Association executive who previously served on his staff. A political source said, "Because Floor Leader Kim and the Bar Association executive who used to be on his staff are in conflict, voices within the Democratic Party are saying that 'a Bar Association recommendation is simply unacceptable.'"
Still, there are predictions that the Democratic Party will not be able to reject the third-party nomination method indefinitely. Public support for a Unification Church special counsel is high, and even the presidential office has called for a swift special counsel. A political source noted, "With high public interest in the Unification Church special counsel, if the Democratic Party rejects the third-party nomination method to the end, it could be seen as defensive and passive."