Acting president vetoes six bills despite DP’s threats of impeachment

Acting President Han Duck-soo on Thursday exercised his veto power over six contentious bills, including revisions to the Grain Management Act, the National Assembly Testimony Appraisal Act, and the National Assembly Act, saying, “I only put the spirits of the Constitution and the future of the country on top priority when I decided to veto the bills.” It has been 20 years since 2004 when Goh Kun, then acting president, wielded his veto power to oppose a revision to the Amnesty Act. Having taken on the job under pressure from the opposition parties, he used his veto power for the first time to deal with these politically sensitive issues putting the ruling and opposition parties in competition. The main opposition Democratic Party of Korea (DPK) said critically, “It is our last warning. We do not want him to cross the line,” pausing to propose an impeachment motion against Han. It may be concluded that the acting president crosses the “red line” if he says no to the appointment of three constitutional judges recommended by the National Assembly or vetoes special probe bills on First Lady Kim Keon Hee and insurrection charges.

In a cabinet meeting on Thursday, Acting President Han deliberately explained why he used his veto right, saying, “I, as the acting president, have long deliberated and pondered upon what decision would sincerely show the government’s sense of responsibility in such a grave national situation.” He claimed that market mechanisms would be distorted to cause an oversupply of certain items such as rice and put fiscal pressure on the government if the controversial four bills pass – including the revision to the Grain Management Act by which the government buys surplus rice if rice prices go below a certain point.

If the bill passes into law, the administration projects that an annual average of up to one trillion won will be spent purchasing excess rice by 2030. Concerning the revision to the National Assembly Act, which removes a clause that automatically brings a government budget bill – if the ruling and opposition parties fail to reach an agreement – to the table for discussion, Han said, “The proposal goes against the Constitution by which the National Assembly should ratify a budget bill within a designated time frame.” He also expressed concern over the amendment to the National Assembly Testimony Appraisal Act that it would infringe on individuals’ privacy and freedom, and the right to personal data self-determination, and hinder the protection of core technologies and trade secrets given that the act would keep businesses from declining to submit their data to the National Assembly at its request.


Hyung-Jun Hwang constant25@donga.com