Lee Jae-myung, leader of the Democratic Party of Korea, who has entered his 15th day of fasting, has been investigated by the prosecution twice even while fasting, and is now observed to be on the verge of a warrant request from the prosecution.
It seems likely that the prosecution will request an arrest warrant this week or next week, tying in suspicions of Ssangbangwool Group’s remittances to North Korea and Baekhyeon-dong development preferential treatment.
As the regular session of the National Assembly is currently being held, in order for the court to substantively review the arrest warrant for Representative Lee, who is an active member of the National Assembly, the arrest motion must pass the plenary session of the National Assembly.
A motion for arrest is passed if a majority of the registered members are present and a majority of the members present agree.
In the political world, the motion for arrest will be reported to the plenary session on the 21st and the bill to be voted on on the 25th is expected to be the most influential.
■ Obtained the Democratic Party’s strategy report… Analysis of the ‘dilemma’ related to the arrest consent bill
If the arrest consent bill goes to the National Assembly for a vote, the Democratic Party cannot help but worry about what to do.
Representative Lee Jae-myung has pledged to ‘give up the privilege of not being arrested’, but due to his health condition due to fasting and worsening public opinion within the party regarding the prosecution’s investigation, there are many voices calling for the arrest bill to be rejected if it is passed to the National Assembly. KBS obtained a strategic report within the Democratic Party
created to find answers to these concerns . This is the result of a study conducted by an organization that researches policies and establishes strategies within the Democratic Party to analyze how it will respond if a motion for arrest comes during the session.
First of all, in the first chapter titled ‘Dilemma’, it was analyzed that ‘if the party participates and rejects the bill, the existing declaration of waiver of the privilege of non-arrest will be overturned.’
Representative Lee announced in his speech as a representative of the negotiating group last June that he would give up his privilege of non-arrest and undergo a substantive review of the warrant.
For this reason, the report stated, ‘If the party participates and rejects the proposal, the ‘lies’ and the ‘bulletproof frame’ are strengthened.’
However, he said , ‘If the party participates and passes the arrest motion, we will be faced with a dilemma of recognizing the prosecution indictment as justified . ‘
■ “If the warrant is dismissed, the prosecution and national power will be dealt a blow”…
In the second part of the dilemma chapter “If arrested, change to non-subrogation system”, future situations were also predicted in cases where the arrest warrant was dismissed and when the person was arrested. It was predicted that if the warrant is dismissed
in the warrant substantive review after the arrest motion is passed, ‘Representative Lee Jae-myung’s system will be strengthened’ and ‘the prosecution and the People Power Party will be dealt a blow.’ However, if he is arrested, it is expected that ‘the party will experience confusion and division and transition to an emergency response committee system.’ ■ Response Plan 1: Democratic Party-led vote… “Distribution of the representative’s pro-war advance” So, the report stated that if a motion for arrest comes during a session of the National Assembly, the party’s position must be decided by unconditional passing. Accordingly, the number of cases in which it is approved was set to two. The first is that it will be ‘passed by the Democratic Party led by Representative Lee Jae-myung’s decision . ’
In the case of this arrest motion, ‘the prosecution’s warrant is not justified, but since it is a promised matter, a method of distributing Representative Lee’s personal war in advance to get it passed along the party line’ is mentioned.
If we do this, we can criticize the prosecution’s request for a warrant during the session as much as possible and point out that it is a ‘political prosecution’.
However, if it is actually passed and a substantive review of the warrant is held, it is believed that there is a possibility that the prosecution will abuse it by saying, ‘Since the Democratic Party passed it, an arrest warrant should be issued.’
He added that if it is not unanimously passed, it could actually serve as a seed of division in the Democratic Party.
■ Response plan 2: People Power-led approval… “Only about 50 people attended and voted”
What is interesting is the second plan, ‘passing led by the People Power Party’ .
The motion for arrest is passed when a majority of the registered members are present and a majority of the members present agree, so it is effectively decided according to the trend of the Democratic Party of 168 seats.
So, this is a scenario in which only about 50 members of the party attend to create a quorum for voting, and all attending members abstain .
At this time, the logic is that if all the People Power Party members vote for the motion, the People Power Party will be the entity that passed the arrest motion.
In particular, it was cited as an advantage that if it is passed but dismissed in the substantive review of the warrant, it could deal a serious blow to the People Power Party that led the passage.
Accordingly, the party itself can relieve itself of the먹튀검증 burden of passing the motion for the representative’s arrest, while at the same time breaking away from the bulletproof frame.
However, the downside was that the implementation process was not simple.
Here, he pointed out ‘criticism that it is a trick’ and ‘there is a problem with selecting the 50 lawmakers to attend.’
■ “One possible scenario”… “On the contrary, it could cause division in the party.” In a phone call with KBS
, a party official said that the plan to have only 50 people attend the vote was “one of the possible scenarios” and “the result of various considerations.” At the same time, regarding the reason why such a scenario is being considered, he mentioned, “If the entire vote is conducted in a situation where voting is not controlled, the judge reviewing the warrant may be excused if there is a mistake.” He continued, “If the Democratic Party joins only a few members and votes them all down, it can show that it does not agree with the arrest motion,” and “It can clearly show that it opposes the purpose of the Democratic Party while throwing away the formal privilege of the arrest motion . ” said. Another Democratic Party member said, “By leaving, all Democratic Party members effectively voted it down,” adding, “Legally, it was a vote, but politically it was a vote.
However, regarding the vote with only a few members attending, a member of the leadership team explained, “This is something that Representative Lee must accept and agree to, and there is also the issue of whether 50 members can directly participate, so the issue of feasibility must also be considered . ” I did.
In the case of another current leadership in the National Assembly, regarding the vote with the participation of a small number of lawmakers, they said , “It is still only the personal opinion of the person who wrote the scenario,” and said, “Gathering only a few people to vote could be a target and cause division in the party .”
At the same time, he said, “It is one of several expected scenarios,” and “This is a sensitive time, so we cannot discuss sensitive issues publicly.”