Former Korea Communications Commission Chairperson Lee Jin-suk, arrested on charges including violations of the National Public Officials Act and the Public Official Election Act, speaks to reporters as she is escorted to the Yeongdeungpo Police Station in Seoul on the 2nd. Yonhap News.

Professor Choi Won-mok of Ewha Womans University Law SchoolFormer KCC Chairperson Lee Jin-suk has been suddenly arrested. The police state they executed an arrest warrant because she failed to respond to six summonses. The suspect's side contends that they submitted valid reasons for non-attendance each time and that the arrest was politically motivated retaliation. Her lawyer argues that a prosecutor or judge would not have issued an arrest warrant if they had reviewed the submitted reasons for non-attendance, and thus it is suspicious that the police requested an arrest warrant without including these reasons. They even demand a parliamentary inquiry into the matter.

The charges against the suspect stem from her remarks made on YouTube in September and October of last year, while she was suspended from her duties as KCC chairperson. The prosecution alleges that her statement, "The Democratic Party and leftist groups are a group that does everything imaginable," violated the duty of political neutrality for public officials. Further, her statements in March and April of this year, such as "Democratic Party lawmakers and Representative Lee Jae-myung are in dereliction of duty," are considered to have been made with the intent of causing Democratic Party candidates to lose elections.

Is it an issue that requires an investigation for violating the duty of political neutrality for a suspect who has faced all sorts of political oppression since taking office as KCC chairperson, to have simply criticized the Democratic Party's actions a few times?

Have current prosecutors, who have frequently appeared on broadcasts and made political remarks in the name of judicial reform, and the act of recruiting judges to go directly to the National Assembly, not all been the work of the Democratic Party?

Were the Supreme Court justices who delayed the election fraud lawsuits for over two years, exceeding the legal deadline of six months, and only began proceedings after core data held by the Election Commission was discarded or altered, upholding their duty of political neutrality? What about the Supreme Court justices who have yet to render a final verdict in the Lee Jae-myung public official election law violation case, thereby contributing to his current presidency? When will the final verdicts be delivered for the appeal of the Lee Jae-myung perjury incitement charges, the Daedong, Wirye, Baekhyeon-dong, and Seongnam FC cases, the North Korea currency dealings with Ssangbangul, and the corporate card private use case?

The force that has led the charge in dismantling the duty of political neutrality for public officials is the Democratic Party, and the person who criticized such conduct is Lee Jin-suk. If civil servants are swayed by political winds, the public sector cannot fulfill its role. At best, career public officials only used to ride the political winds when they reached the level of deputy ministers. The current Democratic Party is the force that has made even division-level officials vulnerable to external pressures. They are the ones who have made public servants, who should serve the long-term national interest, selectively choose to do only what suits the political forces. Consequently, world-leading nuclear power generation technology was dismantled by the Moon Jae-in administration's nuclear phase-out policy, and the diplomatic assets built up over a long period were destroyed by diplomacy focused on attacking Japan and slogans of eradicating deep-rooted evils. The broadcasting and telecommunications sector, directly hit by political winds, is now plagued by fake news and public opinion manipulation.

If we are to bring up the duty of political neutrality for public officials, it is only right that all these violators of political neutrality be summoned and arrested. In the final days of the Yushin regime, public power stormed the Shinmin Party headquarters and even expelled Representative Kim Young-sam for his protests. How did the Democratic Party, which claims to be the former student activist movement that fought against such dictatorial practices, become a totalitarian force that endlessly oppresses its opposition? Is it now showing signs of collapsing on its own like the Yushin regime? Or is it heralding the beginning of a path of indiscriminately purging opposition forces, like China's totalitarian Cultural Revolution?

Professor Choi Won-mok of Ewha Womans University Law School