In the less than two months since the opening of the new National Assembly, the major parties have gone from pledging to give up their privileges, such as immunity from detention, to scratching their heads and saying, “wait a minute.”

Their deflated enthusiasm has been largely spurred by the prosecution’s fast-paced bribery investigation that resulted in an arrest motion for two prominent lawmakers of both the ruling and opposition parties last month.

Faced with the reality of possible arrest, lawmakers came to the realization that the Constitutional protection may be a privilege they are unwilling to sacrifice.

The ruling Saenuri Party’s Rep. Chung Doo-un, for the time being, was saved by his colleagues who voted against the motion for his detention on July 11. The main opposition Democratic United Party floor leader Park Jie-won chose to skip the whole process by voluntarily appearing for questioning on Tuesday as the court asked the Assembly to approve his detention.

But controversy over their detention looms ahead, as the prosecution is determined to carry on with their probe while the rival parties lock horns over the Assembly’s next extraordinary session set to open on Saturday upon the DUP’s demand.

Under the Constitution and the National Assembly Act, the arrest of incumbent lawmakers during a working session must receive approval from a majority of lawmakers.

Political and legal experts said that the essence of the lawmakers’ “privilege of freedom from arrest” should be underscored to find ways to prevent any politicizing or abuse of the immunity.

“The immunity from detention is a universal safeguard installed to help legislators execute their duties free from government interference. In fact, the immunity is therefore all the more crucial in cases where the rivaling parties are sharply divided,” said Dr. Kim Seon-hwa, a legislative researcher for the Political and Parliamentary Affairs Team of the National Assembly’s Research Service.

Germany, for instance, acknowledges a legislator’s immunity from detainment but allows the parliament to conduct its own investigation into a case. The United States, while having the privilege, does not apply it to crimes related to treason or national security. The privilege is also said not to apply in criminal cases, according to precedent.

“It is important to recognize the immunity as a function bestowed on them just during the working Assembly session, and not as a privilege given to an individual,” Kim said.

The rival parties, in the meantime, continue to accuse one another of abusing their privilege.

The Saenuri Party charges that the DUP has pushed to reopen the extraordinary session to avoid the prosecutors’ detention of Park during a non-working session.

“The DUP had promised to give up their privileges and not abuse its immunity from detention. But it is denying the legal order. It must halt an attempt to reopen the session by taking advantage of its privilege,” said Saenuri floor leader Lee Hahn-koo during a party meeting.

The DUP hit back that the Saenuri Party is politicizing the issue to suppress the opposition ahead of the presidential election.

“The Saenuri Party must now stop playing around and come to the August Assembly session to deal with the pledges that we have made with the citizens,” DUP spokesman Park Yong-jin said in a news briefing.

The parliamentary approval rate of arrest motions for lawmakers since the establishment of the Constitution in 1948 has hovered at 5 percent. A total of 44 motions for detainment were submitted to the National Assembly up until 2011, of which nine were approved, 12 were rejected, and 22 were scrapped.

According to the Saenuri Party’s Rep. Kim Hoe-sun, 67 percent, or 24 of the cases involving arrest motions between the 12th National Assembly and the current Assembly, of those accused were later found to be guilty.

Lee Hye-mi, a lawyer and legislative researcher of the National Assembly Research Service, said it is important to find ways to improve the current immunity system.

“It will be desirable to introduce a system in which the National Assembly can mobilize its own investigation over a submitted arrest motion to figure out the seriousness of the case and introduce a process in which such information is provided to the Assembly members (before they vote on the motion),” Lee said.

As part of such efforts, Saenuri Party Rep. Nam Kyung-pil, with the support of 12 other lawmakers, submitted a revision to the Criminal Procedure Law and the National Assembly Act on July 24.

According to the revision, a suspect will be allowed to voluntarily appear for court review on his or her arrest. It will also introduce a process in which the court must submit along with its arrest motion a report on the respective investigation for the lawmakers’ reference.


Past parliament votes on arrest motions for lawmakers (1948-2011)

Approved: 9 

Disapproved :12 

Scrapped: 1

Withdrawn: 22

Total: 44

By Lee Joo-hee (jhl@heraldcorp.com)