(EDITORIAL from the Korea Herald on Oct. 4)

Fair play needed
The annual inspection of government agencies by the National Assembly is a statutory mechanism enabling the legislature to keep the administration in check.

But in practice, partisan interests prevent members of the legislature from being
united in exposing corruption, ill performance and other vices of ministries and
lower-level government agencies.
Instead, opposition lawmakers are alone in launching offensives when the 20-day
inspection starts each fall. Those affiliated with the ruling party usually limit
their roles to answering for beleaguered government agencies. This pattern has
been repeated over and over again since the law on the parliamentary inspection
of government agencies was enacted in 1988.
But this year will be a little different from previous years. The inspection,
starting on Monday, comes in the wake of a parliamentary and presidential shift
from liberal to conservative. The ruling Grand National Party is vowing to delve
into what it regards as the "10-year misrule of the leftist governments." It is
only natural for the main opposition Democratic Party to focus on President Lee
Myung-bak's seven-month rule.
The battle lines are drawn between the Grand National Party and the Democratic
Party, many lawmakers of which constituted the ruling elite during the previous
presidencies of Kim Dae-jung and Roh Moo-hyun. But there is no reason to voice
too much concern about the impending partisan conflict, as some commentators do.
It is in the public's best interest that light is shed on corruption,
mismanagement and other accusations directed against former or incumbent
officials of government agencies. It is also necessary to debate policies the
government agencies implemented, are implementing or are planning to implement.
By doing so, both parties will live up to the spirit of the law governing
parliamentary inspections.
The financial crisis of U.S. origin is a cause of concern, to say the least. The
rival parties will have to address issues concerning how to cope with wild market
swings, an equilibrium exchange rate and how much to keep in the nation's foreign
exchange reserves.
The parties will also have to debate North Korean leader Kim Jong-il's ill health
and its security impact on South Korea. They will have to deal with food safety,
which is undermined by melamine-tainted imports from China.
If the 20-day inquiry is to be productive, both political parties and government
agencies under their scrutiny will have to abandon disreputable practices.
One such practice involves the selection of businesspeople they intend to bring
to the witness stand. They are sometimes either careless or intentional in
dropping the names of businesspeople as potential witnesses. Regarding it as
humiliating to be summoned, some businesspeople resort to lobbying the parties to
take them off the witness list.
The parties will have to go the extra mile in ensuring that testimony from those
selected as witnesses is indispensable. Otherwise, they will be suspected of
having ulterior motives in summoning them.
Another problem is attempts by government agencies to keep hidden the information
that lawmakers lawfully demand during their inquiries. But failure to provide
such timely information constitutes a criminal act punishable with the maximum
three years in prison. Here again, caution is advised. Careless demands represent
obstacles to the efficient functioning of state affairs. It would also result in
wasting time and taxpayers' money.
Lawmakers are also advised not to make unsubstantiated character attacks just
because they are immune from libel laws. Another disagreeable practice they have
to abandon is unnecessary repetition of questions and selective listening of
answers. Fair play is just as important for lawmakers as it is for government
agencies.
(END)