[ad_1]
 |
| Along with young Lee, the leader of the Democratic Party speaks at a press conference held at the Yeouido National Assembly in Seoul on 3. 2020.5.3 / News1 © News1 Reporter Seong Dong-hoon |
Furthermore, the Democratic Party repeatedly resorted to the “constitutionalism” that is taking place in the passport on the 3rd. However, the Future United Party still maintained a parallel line, adhering to the impossibility of the ‘eighth plenary session’ without any doubt.
Democratic Party leader In-young Lee is at a farewell press conference held before the end of his term in the National Assembly the same day. It is time for all of us to do everything possible to overcome the economic crisis that begins with the new coronavirus infection (Corona 19). There is no reason to have this or to exhaust your national power. ”
Representative Lee also voiced suspicion that the future coalition party aimed to promote discussion of the amendment on the proposal for the ‘eighth plenary session’ of the Democratic Party. Disproved
The “National Proposal Amendment”, which was challenged by the United Party, was proposed on March 6 by 148 legislators from the ruling party, and was announced on March 10 through the State Council. According to the Constitution, the proposed amendment must be resolved by the National Assembly within 60 days (May 9) from the date of the announcement. The eighth plenary session is the last opportunity to discuss it.
This proposed amendment aims to add ‘nationals (one million people elected by the National Assembly)’ in addition to the current president and members of the National Assembly (as opposed to current members of Congress), and is a plan to suspend the debate on the amendment instead of the actual amendment. It is a one point amendment.
In response, Lee said, “It is intended that the 9th be Saturday and that I wish to continue the process of terminating the procedure until the 8th. It is not intended to be done for the purpose of the content.” “I was not speaking with the intention of voting.”
In other words, in order to respect the constitutional process, the plenary session is held to vote in any way, but it is an argument that any other public welfare bill pending at the opening of the plenary session will be dealt with.
He said: “It seems unlikely that members of the National Assembly, who are ending their terms, will vote for this (the constitutional amendment proposed by the National Assembly).”
The committee delegation said: “Certainly there is no party official, including myself, who has ever spoken of the amendment.” The committee’s vice chair, Yun Hu-deok, who attended the meeting, also said: “The discussion about holding the last plenary session was never discussed by our party.” It was a shame that the discussion was incorrect because it was overwritten with a constitutional amendment. ”
Despite the appeal of the leadership of the Democratic Party, the United Party believes that the amendment proposed in the ‘eighth plenary session’ is not appropriate for the discussion itself.
As the delegation expected, even if the ‘National Proposal Amendment’ is rejected in plenary session on 8, the intention is to block the discussion itself as much as possible, as there is a possibility that constitutional theory will rise above water at the 21st National Assembly.
In fact, some of the Democratic Party are not only thinking about the ‘National Proposal Review Plan’, but they are also considering amendments such as the introduction of the concept of land publicity and the resignation of the presidential mandate.
A spokesman for the Unification Party, Kim Sung-won, said in News 1 and in the phone call: “Why do you emphasize that it is the last period of the 20th National Assembly until the 29th of this month?”
He added: “The Democratic Party is on the offensive with the black intention of a constitutional amendment plan.”
[ad_2]
