野 “The Democratic Party cannot fill the quorum and is in an uproar … The modern version of the 21st century is blatant.”

Entry 2020.11.02 19:26 | Revision 2020.11.02 19:31

Kim Ki-hyun “What are Dangheon and Danggyu doing?”

The power of People’s Representative Kim Ki-hyun, along with the Democratic Party to nominate for the Seoul-Busan mayoral by-elections this past weekend, was embroiled in the validity controversy with a 26.35% turnout. “The amendment of the modern version of the XXI century No Where the hell is the end of that cheek and hypocrisy?Congressman Kim said on his Facebook page that day: “The Democratic Party voted 86.64% of the vote in favor of the revision of the Party’s constitution, and was highly supported, saying it received great support, but the rights party that participated in the vote represented 26.35% of the total members of the rights party. It is only. “It was not enough to meet a third party, and it was invalid because it could not fill the quorum, which is a requirement to vote “.

‘Sasaoin’ is the logic used by the Liberal Party, the ruling party in 1954, when approving a draft constitutional amendment rejected by the National Assembly for lack of a quorum. At the time, the Liberal Party pushed for a constitutional amendment that allowed President Syngman Rhee to remain in office, but two days later, when 135 votes were less than one vote, two-thirds (136 seats), which is the approval standard for current legislators (206). Two-thirds of the total was 135.33, and since the number below zero does not become one, they claimed the amendment passed with 135 votes.

Representative Kim said: “The Democratic Party Constitution and Party Bylaws stipulate that the votes of all Party members are determined by the vote of more than one-third of the total number of first party voters and a majority of the total number. of valid votes “. “It is not a voting process, but the vote of a former party member asking for a will, so that’s fine,” he said.

Representative Kim said, “When former Seoul Mayor Oh Se-hoon (voter turnout related to free meals) failed to meet with a third, the Democratic Party persistently urged the former mayor to resign and launched a political offensive. Following the revision of the Party Constitution, we cannot help but wonder if the Democratic Party has laws and principles that interpret procedural regulations as sub-guarantees. “

Representative Kim said, “It is not another matter, it is about revising the party constitution, the party constitution, and if you are trying to ignore such a major procedural flaw, what are you doing with the constitution and party regulation? ” It would be less embarrassing to abolish it. “” The leadership of the Democratic Party clearly stated that it is the least way for people to pay the stigma of being a sexual harassment party by declaring non-nomination in the by-elections. “

The Democratic Party voted in favor of the party constitution, “I will not give a candidate for the by-elections due to a major mistake by the party’s public officials,” which took place over the weekend. It was announced that day.

However, according to the Constitution of the Democratic Party, it was known that turnout must be at least one third (33.3%) for a full party vote to be established. Later, the Democratic Party Public Affairs Office explained that it was “to gather public opinion” by means of a warning text. The Party’s Public Information Bureau said that “(the previous voting of the members) was not a procedure of legal purpose, but a procedure to gather opinions of the party members to ensure the political justification of the nomination for re-election.” .

However, the constitution of the party in question is a rule made as part of the political reform in 2015, when President Moon Jae-in was the party’s representative. While the Democratic Party leadership cast an ‘all-party vote’ as the basis for repealing the ‘non-nominated party constitution’, which was a symbol of Democratic reform, the controversy over the validity of the vote was dated, saying: “It is not tied to the nature of the polls to collect public opinion or the party constitution.” It was explained. In this regard, an official of the Popular Force said: “For the Democratic Party, it seems that the constitution of the Party can be changed at any time according to the taste of the party leadership” and “it would be better to get rid of the party constitution itself” .