President Lee Jae-myung is discussing measures to restore and stabilize the livelihoods and economy at a Cabinet meeting held at the Yongsan Presidential Office in Seoul on September 9. 2025.9.9. Yonhap News

President Lee Jae-myung stated at a Cabinet meeting held at the Yongsan Presidential Office on the 9th, referring to recent anti-China rallies in areas like Myeongdong, "What kind of freedom of expression is that? It's a disruption." He added, "Isn't disrupting business by driving away tourists, who are customers, an obstruction of business?" referencing the potential application of the Criminal Act. He ordered relevant ministries, including the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism, the Ministry of the Interior and Safety, and the Ministry of Justice, to devise countermeasures.

Legal circles point out that the President's remarks go beyond mere political rhetoric and may constitute an abuse of power. Article 21 of the Constitution guarantees freedom of assembly and association, and any restrictions must be minimal and enacted by law passed by the National Assembly. The President directly mentioning Criminal Act provisions and instructing restrictions on assemblies could lead to a chilling effect on the exercise of these rights.

Article 123 of the Criminal Act stipulates that public officials who abuse their authority to obstruct the exercise of rights shall be punished for abuse of power. As remarks made at a Cabinet meeting can serve as binding directives to ministers beyond mere opinions, legal controversy is inevitable. Furthermore, whether the obstruction of business charge applies is a matter for judicial determination, and criticism has emerged that the President's suggestion of a direction by stating, "Isn't it obstruction of business?" infringes upon judicial independence.

Controversy over political bias is also being raised. In the past, when the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions (KCTU) burned the U.S. flag or held anti-Japan protests, the government took no significant action. However, the criticism is that the President personally intervened to order strong sanctions against anti-China rallies, representing selective enforcement and a double standard linked to foreign policy.

However, for the crime of abuse of power to be established, it must be proven whether specific sanctions were implemented based on the President's remarks and whether the rights of the rally organizers were actually obstructed. There is a counterargument that it is not easy to assign legal responsibility. Nevertheless, it is undeniable that the remarks themselves have had a chilling effect on freedom of expression.

These remarks are expected to serve as a test of the limits of power and the appropriateness of the constitutional order, going beyond a simple mention at a Cabinet meeting. While it is clear that presidential authority must be used for the national interest, it is pointed out that if it deviates in a direction that infringes upon the guarantee of freedom, it can be an abuse of power and a challenge to the principles of democracy.

#PresidentLeeJaeMyung #CabinetMeeting #DisruptionRemarks #AbuseOfPower #FreedomOfExpression #ObstructionOfBusiness #ConstitutionalControversy #FreedomOfAssembly #JudicialIndependence #DoubleStandard