Home > Opinion > Columns

When a political tactic becomes self-inflicted damage

Published: 06 Nov. 2025, 00:02

Kim Seung-hyun

The author is an editorial writer at the JoongAng Ilbo.

The Democratic Party (DP)’s push for the so-called “trial suspension bill,” once considered a strategic move, has ended in political embarrassment. The presidential office blocked the initiative, calling on the party not to “drag the president into political strife.” As a result, the bill has been temporarily excluded from the party’s broader judicial reform plan — a pause may have saved it from further embarrassment.

Kang Hoon-sik, presidential chief of staff, g Kang Hoon-sik ives a briefing on the trial suspension bill at the presidential office in Yongsan, Seoul, on Nov. 3. [YONHAP]

The bill, which proposes an amendment to the Criminal Procedure Act, was introduced on May 2 by DP lawmaker Kim Yong-min. It is pending a plenary vote after passing a judiciary committee.

Under the proposed new Clause 6, if a defendant is elected president, the court must pause trial proceedings from the date of election to the end of the presidential term.

However, the problem lies with existing clauses. Article 306 currently allows courts to suspend trials when a defendant lacks the mental capacity to stand trial or is too ill to appear in court. Adding “if the defendant is elected president” to this list would place the head of state in the same category as those mentally incompetent or physically incapacitated. Even some legal scholars described the bill as a misplacement of legal logic.

The DP’s desperation at the time was understandable. The bill was drafted the day after the Supreme Court sent back the ruling of then-presidential candidate Lee Jae Myung for violating election law, leading to an existential crisis in an election year. The trial suspension bill was seen as a clever workaround.

The urgency faded when the retrial court postponed proceedings until after the presidential election. Once Lee took office, his legal team invoked Article 84 of the Constitution, which grants sitting presidents temporary immunity from criminal prosecution.

But the sense of crisis has recently re-emerged. During a parliamentary audit, the head of the Seoul high court said a trial could theoretically resume even during a presidency. Around the same time, key figures in the Daejang-dong development scandal received heavy sentences. Some in the DP then rushed to revive the bill — a move that even fellow party members criticized as “scratching a scab.”

A similar pattern appeared in the controversy over summoning Kim Hyun-ji, the first presidential protocol chief. Previous presidential secretaries for general affairs have testified in audits, but Kim was excluded, with the party claiming it was to prevent political theater. Instead, it made Kim appear untouchable. Her transfer from general affairs secretary to protocol chief also raised suspicions of evasion. A compromise to have her attend only the morning session was mocked as a “half-and-half solution.”

Kim Hyun-ji, first presidential protocol chief, attends a senior secretariat meeting at the presidential office in Yongsan, Seoul, on Oct. 2. [YONHAP]

Despite holding a parliamentary majority and strong public support, the DP appears overly defensive, even anxious. In trying to avoid political liability, it risks inviting deeper controversy. This pattern of rushing legal changes, shielding figures from scrutiny and framing criticism as political attacks has now become familiar.

The trial suspension bill, once called a safeguard for constitutional order, now looks politically clumsy and legally inconsistent. Rather than shielding the president, it risks diminishing the dignity of the office by linking it to legal provisions meant for the incapacitated.

There is growing concern about how many more such brilliant strategies that turn into self-inflicted wounds the public will witness.

This article was originally written in Korean and translated by a bilingual reporter with the help of generative AI tools. It was then edited by a native English-speaking editor. All AI-assisted translations are reviewed and refined by our newsroom.