[Editorial] We Welcome More Confirmation Hearings
The ruling and opposition parties are speaking with rare unity about expanding the range of high-level government positions requiring review by National Assembly committee. Uri Party began by proposing that there be hearings for Constitutional Court justices, even those nominated by the president and the chief justice on the Supreme Court, and for nominees for the National Election Commission. The Grand National Party (GNP) immediately welcomed the idea. Both parties had already agreed to requiring hearings for all members of cabinet. This is a welcome development.
The idea is to prevent appointments from being used as means for political payback by having the responsible National Assembly committee examine nominees’ qualities, abilities, and ethical standing. It would also have the effect of instilling would be government servants with a healthy sense of fear. That is why there are review hearings for positions such as the director of the National Intelligence Service, the Supreme Public Prosecutor General, the superintendent of the National Police Agency, and the director of the National Tax service, even though no required by the Constitution.
The chief justice of the Supreme Court nominates three candidates each for the Constitutional Court and the National Election Commission, and some people might suggest requiring confirmation for people nominated by the chief justice of the Supreme Court infringes on the authority of the judicial branch of government. However, it would be unbalanced to have hearings for some nominees and not for others. It would be hard for those not confirmed by the National Assembly to carry out their duties with authority.
There appear to be voices within Uri suggesting that committee hearings “approve” nominations for Constitutional Court justice instead of “recommending” them, but that would likely be inconsistent with the spirit of the Constitution since the responsible committee approves the three justices selected by the National Assembly whereas everyone else does not constitutionally require approval. Currently the appointment hearing for the director of the National Intelligence Service issues only an official National Assembly opinion.
The GNP wants to have hearings for the directors of the Financial Supervisory Commission and the Fair Trade Commission as well. In principle there should indeed be National Assembly committee hearings for an increasingly wider range of positions. But if hearings are to do what they are supposed to there will have to be a lot of changes in the way they are carried out. All too often hearings end up being less about examining nominees’ qualifications and instead are used as means to go on political offensives. The discussion about what positions should require committee review should be carried out in conjunction with discussion about ways for more mature management of the actual hearings.
The Hankyoreh, 18 June 2005.
[Translations by Seoul Selection (PMS)]
[Editorial] We Welcome More Confirmation Hearings |
