[ad_1]
It was confirmed on the 14th that the National Rights Commission has launched an investigation against Minister of Justice Choo Mi-ae and the Ministry of National Defense on suspicion of the preferential military service of Choo’s son.
In response to the case presented to Representative Lee Young, the people’s power that day, the Kwon Ik Committee said: “The Ministry of Justice and the Ministry of Defense have actually asked whether there was a request for the extension of the Minister’s son’s vacation. of Justice, selection of interpreters and allocation of troops “. . In particular, the Kwon Ik Committee announced that it requested ‘all the grounds and related data to judge that he did not violate laws and regulations related to the suspicion of solicitation, such as the extension of the vacation of the son of the Minister of Justice in relation to the report the 10th media. The “Permission of the Minister of Justice’s son” of the Ministry of National Defense distributed on the 10th will be used to examine the bases to determine that there is no procedural problem with the permission of the Minister Chu’s son.
The Kwon Ik Committee also gave the first response on whether this case is a violation of the law of prohibition of applications. Kwon Ik-Com said that it is very likely to violate the Application Prohibition Law if it is revealed that Assistant Minister Chu, etc., requested to deploy troops, select interpreters and extend the license.
In its reply, the Korea Rights Commission said: “According to Article 5, Paragraph 1 of the Law on Prohibition of Applications, no one should make illegal requests to public officials performing their functions, either directly or through a third”. In the same paragraph, “Number 11 of the same paragraph stipulates that ‘actions to address tasks related to military service, such as trial of military service, assignment to units, assignments, etc. in violation of laws and regulations’ are subject to fraudulent requests. ” Meanwhile, he said that violations of the laws, which are a requirement for the establishment of an unfair request, include not only laws, but also presidential decrees, prime minister decrees, ministerial decrees, public notices and directives. In addition to individual laws and regulations directly related to the work subject to fraudulent bidding, it was also revealed that the bidding case in violation of the National Law of Public Officials, the Criminal Law and the Code of Conduct for Public Officials is also a violation of the law.
However, the KFTC will thoroughly consider whether or not it is the reason for the illegal application exception under section 5 (2) of the Application Prohibition Act, as a duty waiver application in accordance with the prescribed procedures and methods. by the Civil Service Law. You have to judge. “If the allegations from Minister Chu’s side that” it was a simple investigation, not a request “are accepted, it cannot be a violation of the law of prohibition of requests.
Representative Lee Young said, “The gist of this case is the suspicion and related evidence that the leader of the ruling party that won the presidential election mobilized his aides and other aides to request government ministries such as the Ministry of National Defense.” It appears to be claiming to be a ‘simple civil petition,’ but the power of persuasion is greatly reduced. “Representative Lee said,” The Ministry of Justice and the Ministry of Defense should sincerely respond to the investigation of the rights and interests committee and present all the requested data. As rights and interests are an important matter observed by people, we must investigate thoroughly and reveal the truth. “
On the other hand, Kwon Ik-com responded to the suspicion that Minister Chu asked his daughter to issue a student visa for France, with the intention that even if it is true, it is likely that he will not violate the prohibition law of requests. The KFTC said: “Unauthorized application under the Application Prohibition Act is a case where a request is made to a ‘public official, etc.’ who performs his functions directly or through a third party. In the case of applying for a visa for a foreign embassy, the foreign public official in charge is subject to the ‘Not included in “(Article 2, paragraph 2 of the Law)” . “In this case, the act of requesting a Korean diplomatic official, who is an intermediary forwarder, to expedite the issuance of visas, is not a request to the direct person in charge of the visa issuance business, so not constitutes an illegal application under the Law on Prohibition of Applications. “
