Jang Dong-hyuk, the leader of the People Power Party, speaks into a megaphone at the handball stadium in Olympic Park, Songpa-gu, Seoul, on the 5th, where vote counting is underway at the Jamsil 7-dong polling station.  [Photo=Yonhap News]

After the June 3rd local elections concluded, the first voices to emerge from within the so-called "pro-Lee" faction of the People Power Party were not calls for a full investigation into the responsibilities of the National Election Commission. Nor were they demands for an investigation into the truth behind the ballot paper shortage. Nor was it a concerted effort to address the procedural questions raised by the controversy surrounding the Jamsil 7-dong polling station in Songpa-gu, Seoul. 

Instead, the "pro-Lee" faction lawmakers first raised the issue of Leader Jang Dong-hyuk's resignation and the return of former leader Han Dong-hoon to the party. Han Dong-hoon, who was elected, remains silent on the so-called "deprivation of suffrage" incident.

Are they in their right minds?

What the public witnessed in this election was not simply logistical confusion at the polling stations. Ballots were insufficient, preventing voters from casting their votes normally within the allotted time. Voting was delayed at some polling stations, and at Jamsil 7-dong Polling Station No. 2, extreme confrontation ensued over the removal of ballot boxes and the counting of votes. 

Elections are not justified solely by their outcome. The legitimacy of an election is only secured when the preparations, on-site management, ballot box storage and transportation, and the entire vote-counting process can be explained to the public.

In such a situation, the opposition lawmakers had a clear priority. 

They should have demanded that the National Election Commission disclose the details of ballot paper production and distribution. They should have demanded on-site reports from areas where voting was delayed and the chain of command be clarified. 

They should have investigated whether observation and supervision were properly carried out during the storage, transportation, and counting of ballot boxes. If necessary, they should have demanded a parliamentary audit, a government audit, and even an investigation. 

It was the opposition party's primary duty to question whether the public's right to vote had been adequately guaranteed.

However, the first message chosen by the "pro-Lee" faction was different. 

Lawmaker Woo Jae-joon spoke of Leader Jang Dong-hyuk's resignation and former leader Han Dong-hoon's return. Lawmaker Park Jung-hoon advocated for the resignation of the entire leadership. 

Of course, after an election defeat, calls for leadership accountability can be raised. It is natural for a political party to evaluate its leadership in light of election results. Debates can be held on whether Leader Jang Dong-hyuk's tenure was successful, whether the candidate nominations and election strategies were appropriate, and whether the expulsion of former leader Han Dong-hoon exacerbated internal divisions.

The problem is the order.

What the public is asking now is not "Who will seize leadership of the People Power Party?" but "Was my vote properly cast?" "Why were there not enough ballots?" "Why could the National Election Commission not prevent such an incident?" "Through what process were the ballot boxes transported, and under what observation structure was the vote counting conducted?" 

If opposition lawmakers, faced with these questions, first cry out for a reshuffle of party power, what will the public see? They will see politics that prioritizes party power over suffrage, and politics that calculates the return of one's own faction before the public's anger.

The "pro-Lee" faction can criticize Leader Jang. However, the moment they present the issue of Leader Jang's resignation as the party's top priority at this juncture, their criticism appears not as an election evaluation but as a power struggle. 

Furthermore, bringing up the issue of former leader Han Dong-hoon's return simultaneously is even more inappropriate. 

Is it the time for the People Power Party to be discussing reinstatement procedures? Is it the time to talk about provisional injunctions? When the issue of guaranteeing the public's right to vote is at the center of political discourse, statements that suggest a specific politician's return to the party takes precedence starkly reveal the priorities of opposition politics. 

An opposition party or a factional office?

An opposition party crumbles not so much when it loses an election, but when it fails to read the public's anger. 

The public's anger now is not simply about the outcome of a particular candidate's election. It is about whether the election management system can truly be trusted. It is about whether the public's rights at the polling stations were sidelined due to administrative convenience and insufficient preparation. It is about whether the National Election Commission's explanation of it being a mistake is the end of the matter. 

An opposition party that cannot grapple with these questions is not an opposition party. It is merely a factional office. 

If Leader Jang Dong-hyuk's administration is responsible, then accountability should be demanded. If a national convention is necessary, then a national convention should be held. However, that discussion should come *after* the investigation into the election management failure, not before.

More important than who is in the opposition party's leadership is whether the opposition party has the will to protect the public's right to vote. Politics that prioritizes party power over suffrage is abandoned by the public. 

The "pro-Lee" faction lawmakers must ask themselves. 

Is "Jang Dong-hyuk's resignation" truly what the public wants right now? Is it "Han Dong-hoon's return"? Or is it "The National Election Commission must disclose all materials to the public"? If they are opposition lawmakers, the answer should be clear. 

The public's votes come first. The public's rights come first. The legitimacy of election procedures comes first. 

Politics moves towards power. However, an opposition party has a duty of oversight *before* power. This is especially true in the immediate aftermath of a controversy over election management failure. 

Those who, at this time, bring up factional interests first are not representatives of the public but are closer to political technicians who follow the scent of power. 

What the People Power Party needs to do now is not to debate former leader Han Dong-hoon's return. Nor is it to debate Leader Jang Dong-hyuk's resignation. First, they must thoroughly demand accountability from the National Election Commission. They must uncover the cause of the ballot paper shortage. They must confirm the procedures surrounding the Jamsil 7-dong ballot box controversy. 

They must ascertain what explanation the state will provide to the public who feel their right to vote was violated. 

Then comes party power. 

A party that prioritizes party power over suffrage cannot protect the public. Politicians who, faced with controversy over election management failure, first calculate the return of their own faction, are not qualified to represent the public's anger. To the "pro-Lee" faction lawmakers, I ask.

"Are the 'pro-Lee' faction in their right minds?"