President Lee Jae-myung confronted the controversy over the attendance of the head of the Serious Crimes Investigation Agency at Cabinet meetings head-on, raising the prospect of impeachment and even criminal punishment. The Blue House also repeatedly stressed the legal legitimacy of the arrangement, but critics say it has not adequately answered public concern that the very structure of having the head of an investigative body regularly sit across from the president and Cabinet ministers could undermine political neutrality and independence.
Lee wrote on X, formerly Twitter, on the 22nd that "abandoning direction and supervision of the Serious Crimes Investigation Agency would violate the Constitution and the Government Organization Act, and would be grounds for impeachment," adding that it would be "a crime punishable as dereliction of duty." He went on to stress that "the president's direction and supervision of state affairs is both an authority and a responsibility," and that "the Public Prosecution Office, the Korea Meteorological Administration, the National Fire Agency and every other ministry, office and agency is subject to the direction and supervision of the president and the prime minister."
Lee asked pointedly whether critics were telling him "to violate the Constitution and the law by not directing and supervising the Serious Crimes Investigation Agency," and whether they wanted that supervision "carried out behind closed doors rather than in open meetings." He argued that "the claim that excluding them from open meetings is a way to secure political neutrality is illogical." On his citation a day earlier of the generative artificial intelligence Gemini, he explained that he "did not quote it out of ignorance, but to let people feel how far that argument departs from elementary logic and the facts."
Earlier in the day, Blue House Senior Secretary for Public Relations and Communication Sung Ki-hong also emphasized at a briefing at the Chunchugwan press center that the attendance of investigative agency heads at Cabinet meetings reflects "the president's consistent philosophy of government." Sung said it was "the president's consistent conviction and will to run Cabinet meetings on the basis of transparency, openness and accountability."
Sung said that "Cabinet meetings will not touch on anything related to the direction of investigations or prosecutions in specific individual cases." He also cited Lee's recent instruction that officials draw up measures "with the resolve of declaring war on violent crime." Sung asked, "Can that also be seen as the president directing an investigation?" and stressed that "general direction and supervision of state affairs is different from directing an investigation into an individual case."
A senior Blue House official said, "I would ask in return whether the prosecutor general was politically independent and free of political prosecution back when he did not attend Cabinet meetings." The point, the official said, is that judging an investigative body's political neutrality solely by whether its head attends such meetings is one-dimensional, and that the will of the president and the agency head, along with institutional safeguards, must be considered together.
Some observers note that investigative agency heads have regularly attended Cabinet meetings since the current administration took office, yet the controversy grew only after Kim Ji-yong was appointed head of the Serious Crimes Investigation Agency. Seo Yong-joo, head of the Mac Institute for Politics and Society, said attention should be paid to the fact that "not only outside attacks from opponents of prosecution reform but also objections to Kim's appointment from within the ruling bloc are intertwined here." In other words, the president's moves can be read as an effort to give Kim as much backing as possible. Lee Jae-mook, a professor at Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, said the strong messaging reflects "a keen sense of the need for a newly launched agency to settle in during its early days, as the criminal justice system is being restructured."
Even so, concerns about the political independence and neutrality of investigative bodies have not subsided. Because the president and Cabinet ministers themselves could become subjects of investigation, critics say the mere sight of an investigative agency head sitting in regular meetings with them runs counter to public sentiment and perception. Shin Yul, a professor at Myongji University, said, "This is not about examining the constitutional and legal grounds for attending Cabinet meetings," adding that "the public is worried about the blurred boundary between so-called democratic control and the political independence of investigative agencies."
Rep. Kim Young-jin of the Democratic Party of Korea, a close ally of the president, also stressed in a radio interview that "there needs to be deftness in how this is handled — how the independence and fairness of the Serious Crimes Investigation Agency will be preserved, and a broad view that takes in not only the president's authority under the Constitution and the Government Organization Act but also how the public sees this and what it expects."
The Blue House dismissed such concerns, pointing to the deterrent effect of broadcasting Cabinet meetings live. The Blue House official said, "Because the public is watching through open Cabinet meetings, checks are possible, and the heads of investigative agencies will conduct investigations with care so as not to be misunderstood."