A legal mind clashing with public sentiment (KOR)

Home > Think English > Bilingual News

A legal mind clashing with public sentiment (KOR)

Published: 10 Oct. 2024, 10:49

OH HYUN-SEOK
The author is a political news reporter of the JoongAng Ilbo.

“There’s no regulation to punish her, and clearly, there is no charge,” claimed the presidential office on Oct. 3 over the first lady’s suspicious acceptance of a luxury bag from a mysterious pastor. The presidential office’s claim may be true in terms of legal principles. The Improper Solicitation and Graft Act doesn’t stipulate punishment of a public official’s spouse. A spouse of an official will not be punished for receiving a luxury bag worth more than 3 million won ($2,232). President Yoon Suk Yeol, a public official, can be punished only when his spouse’s receipt of money and goods is related to his duties. After reviewing precedents, the prosecution decided to not indict the first lady because the gift was not related to the president’s job.

Adhering to legal principles cannot make the argument convincing. Since the anti-graft act took effect in 2016, Korean people couldn’t give their children’s teachers a gift for Teachers’ Day. However, even after the wife of the incumbent president received a luxury bag as a gift, the presidential office found nothing wrong with it. That doesn’t make sense. On the next day, a special motion to investigate the first lady was put to a revote — and at least four members of the governing party voted for the motion. A first-term lawmaker even said, “The deviation from the party line resulted from the attitude of the presidential office.”

The legal mind of not caring about public opinion and only respecting legal principles may be a virtue for a prosecutor but is a disqualifying factor for a politician. The essence of politics is to listen to the people. Moreover, the public sentiment is especially strict on the families of those in power. Whenever a corruption allegation arose over family members of major politicians, including former presidents Kim Young-sam and Kim Dae-jung, the leaders voluntarily gave up the protection of the law.

When Kim Hong-gul, Kim Dae-jung’s youngest son who was staying in the United States, was allegedly involved in corruption in 2002, President Kim ordered his son, through his aide, to faithfully comply with the investigation and accept punishment if he was found guilty. It took only two days for him to return and get investigated by prosecutors. As the president is also a human, he must have felt heartbroken. In his memoir, President Kim wrote that he felt like “falling into an endless pit several times a day.”

Former president Kim Young-sam was even more strict. After the Central Investigation Department of the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office failed to prove charges against his second son Kim Hyun-chul even after interrogating him for 26 hours in February 1997, the president blamed the prosecutor general for not thoroughly investigating his son. “It must have been good news to the president as a father, but the president wondered if the investigation results were strong enough to convince the people,” recalled Oh In-hwan, then-minister of public information, according to a memoir by the minister. The Blue House replaced the chief of the Central Investigation Department in the top prosecutors’ office and allowed the prosecution to detain the incumbent president’s son for a separate investigation. Sometimes, heads of state must endure pain to meet the public’s expectations.

On Oct. 8, the opposition Democratic Party (DP) submitted a request for a standing independent counsel investigation into Kim’s case. The DP also proposed a revision to the National Assembly rules to exclude the governing party from the process of recommending independent counsel candidates. The party also warned that it will propose another motion to appoint a standing special in accordance with legal principles. The DP, holding a majority in the legislature, certainly has more cards in its hands than the governing party.

리걸 마인드와 국민 눈높이
오현석 정치부 기자

“처벌 규정 자체가 없는 등 혐의없음이 명백한 사안이다.” 김건희 여사의 명품백 의혹 무혐의 처분에 대해 3일 대통령실이 내놓은 입장이다. 법리로만 보면 맞는 얘기일 수 있다. 청탁금지법엔 공직자 배우자 처벌 규정이 없다. 300만원 이상 명품 가방을 선물 받아도 배우자는 처벌되지 않는다. 공직자인 윤석열 대통령은 배우자의 금품 수수가 자신의 직무와 관련돼야만 처벌된다. 검찰은 판례 검토 결과 직무 관련성이 없다고 판단했다.

하지만 법리에 충실하다고 설득력이 생기는 건 아니다. 청탁금지법이 시행된 2016년 이후 국민은 초등학생 자녀 선생님께 스승의날 선물도 드리지 못한다. 그런데 현직 대통령 부인이 명품 가방을 선물 받은 게 “혐의없음이 명백한 사안”이라니. 백번 양보해도 대통령실의 입장으론 부적절한 표현이다. 그다음 날 ‘김건희 특검법’ 재표결에선 여당 의원 최소 4명이 ‘반대 당론’이 아닌 찬성·무효·기권으로 이탈했다. 여당 초선 의원은 “단일대오를 무너뜨린 건 다름 아닌 대통령실의 태도”라고 꼬집었다.

여론 눈치를 살피지 않고 법리를 따지는 ‘리걸 마인드(legal mind)’는 검사에겐 미덕일 수 있으나, 정치인에겐 결격 사유다. 민심에 귀 기울이는 게 정치의 본령이기 때문이다. 더구나 민심은 권력자 가족에 유독 엄격하다. 과거 YS·DJ 같은 큰 정치인이 가족 비리 의혹이 불거질 때마다 법리의 보호막을 스스로 내려놓은 이유다.

DJ는 2002년 미국에 머물던 막내 김홍걸 씨의 비리 연루 의혹이 불거지자, 부속실장을 통해 “수사에 성실하게 응하라. 죄가 있으면 받으라”라고 지시했다. 귀국 후 구속까지 단 이틀 걸렸다. 대통령이라고 왜 비통함이 없겠는가. DJ는 회고록에 “하루에도 몇 번씩 천 길 낭떠러지로 떨어졌다”고 적었다.

YS는 더 독했다. 1997년 2월 차남 김현철 씨를 26시간 조사한 대검 중수부가 혐의 입증에 실패하자, 수사가 미진한 게 아니냐고 검찰총장을 질책했다. “아버지 입장에서 반가운 소식일 수 있으나, 대통령의 관점에서 보면 ‘국민이 납득할 수 있겠느냐’는 의문이 나올 수밖에 없었다”는 게 오인환 당시 공보처 장관의 회고다(『김영삼 재평가』). 청와대는 대검 중수부장을 교체했고, 검찰이 현직 대통령 아들을 별건 수사로 구속하는 걸 용인했다. 대통령이 국민 눈높이에 맞추려면 때론 고통을 감내해야 한다.

더불어민주당은 8일 김 여사에 대한 상설특검 수사요구안을 제출했다. 후보자 추천 과정에 여당을 배제하는 국회 규칙 개정안도 함께 발의했다. 특검법을 또 발의한다는 엄포도 잊지 않았다. 법리로만 다투면, 손에 든 패가 많은 쪽은 과반 의석을 가진 민주당이다.