Woo Jong-hwan, vice chair of the People Power Party's central ethics committee, on Monday directly rebuffed a warning from ethics committee Chair Yun Min-woo over an alleged breach of confidentiality, saying he had not leaked secrets but had raised concerns about procedural flaws in the committee's decision-making process.
Speaking on KBS Radio's "Jeongyeok Sisa" program that day, Woo said, "The people who have spoken publicly are myself and committee member Jeong Gyeong-uk — I believe the warning was aimed at me." He added that what he had disclosed was not confidential information but rather problems with how decisions were being made.
Woo said he had received a tip that the chair had been communicating with outside parties during the drafting of a decision document — a process that should have involved only committee members. "I had held back from mentioning it so as not to reflect badly on the chair," he said, "but instead I was warned for violating my duty of confidentiality."
Woo particularly took issue with a committee meeting held July 22. He said the quorum for a seven-member committee is four, but only three members were present because he could not attend. Despite that, disciplinary guidelines were announced in the committee's name.
"What I pointed out was that the announcement was made as if a quorum had been reached when it had not — I did not leak any secrets," he said.
Woo also challenged the substance of the disciplinary standards at issue. He said the guidelines contained language penalizing conduct that "excessively and intentionally, repeatedly, organizationally and persistently obstructs the party leader or the party's normal operations." He called the phrase "excessively intentional" neither a legal term nor a meaningful standard, and said it was hard to believe the committee's legal professionals had given it sufficient review.
He went on to say there was no clear standard for what actions against the party leader would trigger discipline. "There was a risk of creating the impression that the ethics committee's independence was being compromised," he said, "which is why thorough discussion was needed."
Earlier Monday, Woo and fellow committee member Hwang Gyeong-seop issued a statement alleging that Chair Yun had leaked disciplinary materials outside the committee and calling on him to resign voluntarily. Woo said he had repeatedly asked the chair for an explanation but received no response, and had instead been accused of being aligned with the pro-Han Dong-hoon faction. "I ultimately concluded it was right to speak out, even if it had to be from outside," he said.
On the recent wave of resignations from the ethics committee, Woo said the direct cause was the exposure of members' personal information, but acknowledged that the burden of how the committee had been run "was not entirely absent" as a factor.
Woo also raised concerns about the committee's voting structure. Under the rules, he said, a committee of just five members requires a quorum of only three, and a decision can pass with just two votes in favor. "It may be valid under the rules, but in terms of acceptability, it could be hard for the public or party members to accept," he said.
On the committee's future direction, Woo said he did not doubt the conscience of its members, but called for a consensus-based approach in which members are fully consulted during deliberations and legal professionals' views are reflected in well-crafted decision documents.
He added that meeting schedules had recently been communicated to him unilaterally, without prior consultation with the vice chair — a departure from past practice. "If this continues, there is a concern that opportunities to raise views from within will diminish," he said.
thanks@heraldcorp.com
