[ad_1]
 |
|
| ▲ The secretary of the Democratic Party, Hye-ryeon Paik, and the legislators who attended the general meeting of the Judicial Legislative Committee of the National Assembly on the 8th. | |
| Ⓒ Joint coverage photo |
See related photos |
In addition, the ‘3% rule’, which was the biggest problem of the so-called ‘3 Fair Economy Law (Amendment to the Commercial Law, Amendment to the Fair Trade Law, Enactment of the Financial Group Supervision Law)’ (restricted to a maximum of 3% of the total voting rights of the main shareholders and special parties) On the 8th, the Legal and Judicial Affairs Commission approved the reform to the Commercial Law, which significantly deviated from the original government project , leaving only the resolution of the plenary session on the 9th. In accordance with the demands of the business community, the voting rights of the main shareholders and specially related persons were relaxed to “individual 3%” instead of “total 3%”.
Criticism emerged from civil society such as solidarity participation, as well as from the Democratic Party, in addition to “withdrawing from the legislation that came out during the Park Geun-hye administration.” The ‘3% rule’ was the one most strongly opposed by the business world during this revision of Fair Economy Law 3, and it was an issue that publicly questioned opinions within the Democratic Party leadership.
The Democratic Party held a plenary meeting with the Ahn Construction Committee of the Judicial Committee in the afternoon this afternoon with the lack of power of the people in the National Assembly and decided on amendments only to the Commercial Law. Although the existing ‘separate election of the members of the audit committee’ is maintained, it is intended to individually recognize the voting rights of the main shareholders and related persons by 3%. This is a throwback from the original draft presented by the government in August, which allowed only 3% of the total voting rights of the main shareholders and specially related persons.
Immediately, it is criticized that “the purpose of the bill of ‘separate election of the audit committees’ by relaxing the rule of 3% that represents the interests of the chaebols has been neutralized”. Kim Joo-ho, head of the 1st Social Economy Team at the Economic and Financial Center of Solidarity Participation, said in a talk of the day and said: “In fact, the main shareholders of the chaebol companies have allowed the obvious ‘trick’ how to mobilize affiliates to increase the voting rights of related people indefinitely. They not only withdrew, but also destroyed the effectiveness of the bill. “
“The Democratic Party has been saying that it cannot amend the Commercial Law due to opposition from the popular power,” Kim said. “However, the power of the people did not participate at all in this resolution. The responsibility for this withdrawal rests entirely with the Democratic Party.” Tight.
Even within the Democratic Party, “Park Geun-hye is retiring from within … What is this fair economy law?”
 |
|
| ▲ Along with Democratic Party Representative Nak-Yeon Lee (center), Park Tae-yeon Kim (right), Chief Commissioner Kim Jong-min (left) | |
| Ⓒ Joint coverage photo |
See related photos |
Not only civil society, but even within the Democratic Party, there are voices of criticism that say: “This amendment to the Commercial Law is supported by the bill of the Park Geun-hye administration in the past.” Democrat A, who knows the bill process, said: “Compared to the Park Geun-hye administration’s trade law amendment that included mandatory intensive voting and separate elections for all audit committee members , this original government draft did not have an intensive voting system and only one member of the audit committee was mandatory. He criticized it saying: “However, the party has dealt with the amendment to the trade law, which has been withdrawn far from the original government draft. “
Member B of the same party also said: “It showed that the level of economic democratization of our party was low.” He said: “The core of the Third Fair Economy Law is the 3% rule, but I don’t understand what the ‘fair economy’ law is.” I was full.
Democratic Party C official also said: “I don’t know why some chaebol chiefs are doing things that coincide with the will of the family, saying they will reform,” and “Some chaebols withdrawing from the original proposal issued by the government are consequently ‘an attack on management rights’ He noted: “Is it just the appearance that has been pushed through the field?”
Previously, business circles such as the Korean Chamber of Commerce and the Korean Entrepreneurs Federation had more strongly opposed the introduction of the “3% rule” among the three fair economy laws. Consequently, disagreements were expressed within the Democratic Party and, in particular, the Democratic Party and the Policy Committee are reported to have largely agreed with the views of the business community. Even in October, the Democratic Party leadership had a public showdown between Yang Hyang-ja, who openly opposed the 3% rule, and Park Hong-bae, who opposed it.
[관련 기사]
‘Conflict’ with Yang Hyang-bae Park Hong-bae “Technology leakage due to the Third Law of Fair Economy? Nonsense” http://omn.kr/1pqkm
Revelation of the leadership clash with the ‘Law of the Three Fair Economics’, Lee Nak-yeon is “good” … http://omn.kr/1ptem
Yang Hyang-ja, who mentions Lee Kun-hee as “only for illegal companies” and brought up the ‘easing of the 3% rule’ http://omn.kr/1q0tu
