Yong Hye-in, the nominee for minister of gender equality and family, stepped down voluntarily on the 13th, 14 days after being named on Aug. 30. At a press conference at the National Assembly that day, Yong said the Democratic Party of Korea had asked for a decision. As recently as the 10th, Yong had made clear an intention to confront the various controversies head-on through a confirmation hearing, arguing that holding both a National Assembly seat and a cabinet post is legally permitted. But as public opinion worsened further and the Democratic Party joined in pressing for a resignation, the position appears to have shifted within three days.
The episode lays bare how complacent the presidential office and the Democratic Party have been. Even as controversies surrounding Yong and Kim Seung-won, the nominee for justice minister, spread day after day, the presidential office deflected responsibility, saying it would make a judgment after the hearing process based on public expectations. The Democratic Party bears no light share of the blame, either, since it was the party that handed Yong a proportional representation seat twice through a satellite party alliance.
Rep. Kim Tae-sun, chief of staff to Democratic Party leader Kim Min-seok, acknowledged that day that the resignation had been urged, saying there were aspects that did not fully meet public expectations and sentiment. Yet on Kim Seung-won, the Democratic Party has rushed to shield him, calling it an appointment that looks better the more closely one looks. This can only be called a double standard. Kim faces allegations including soliciting approval for a new drug's clinical trial and involvement in stock price manipulation. A Gallup Korea survey found that only 22% considered Kim suitable, while 43% found him unsuitable — nearly twice as many. That is why critics say Yong's resignation amounts to cutting off the tail to save Kim.
It is only right that Kim, like Yong, decide his own future. The justice minister directs and oversees all of legal administration, including the prosecution service. That demands high ethical standards and public trust. The Democratic Party must not bury the allegations with a hollow hearing that fails to properly examine them. The presidential office, too, should take this episode as an occasion to overhaul its personnel vetting system entirely and screen out unqualified candidates before the nomination stage. Otherwise, disputes over ideologically driven appointments and personnel failures will keep recurring, and support for the administration could fall further.
