Roh again crosses the line

President Roh Moo-hyun’s careless remarks have gone too far, to the extent of threatening the foundation of the country. He ignores the national law, denies the Constitutional Court and disregards the National Election Commission. These are enough reasons for an impeachment. But there is a short time left in his term and an impeachment would cause instability in state affairs and the economy. In fact, in 2004, an impeachment actually helped him and his administration a lot. It is regrettable that now we have to be very cautious when talking about impeaching the president.
In his lecture at Wonkwang University yesterday, Roh criticized the campaign pledges of the two presidential hopefuls of the Grand National Party. On Thursday, the National Election Commission ruled that Roh’s remarks at the Participatory Government Evaluation Forum on Saturday were against Article 9 of the related election law, which states the president has a duty to maintain political neutrality as a public servant. The commission issued a warning to him, but the very next day, the president committed the same offense.
Roh disregarded the National Election Commission. Under the Constitution, it is an independent body just like the president. As for Article 9 of the election law, the president said it is a hypocritical clause not found in any other country in the world. That is the same as labeling the National Election Commission a hypocritical institution because the commission made the decision based on that article. The warning of the commission, which is a constitutional institution, should be taken as a warning of the people. The president, in a sense, slapped the people in the face.
The president disregarded the Constitution and the Constitutional Court as well. He dared to call the Constitution the “damn Constitution.” If a U.S. president put an adjective like that in front of the Constitution, that would be a enough reason to create a debate on his impeachment.
Roh is now running toward an “anomie state.” The country must stop him in the name of national law. It must show him that the country and the law are more important and will last longer that an arrogant president and his administration.
The National Election Commission should hold a meeting again and judge the president’s repeated offense. The commission must rule whether the president’s recent remarks are part of an election campaign. If they are, the commission must report him to the prosecution.