ACRC hosts the 5th Public-private Consultative Council for Transparent Society

November 2, 2018

Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission

The Republic of Korea

Representatives of various sectors were brought together to discuss measures to tackle anti-corruption reform challenges, such as unfair allocation and execution of budget for special activity funds, accounting transparency in public interest corporations, and special treatment for former judicial officials.

On the afternoon of the second of December, at the Korea Press Center, ACRC held the 5th Public-private Consultative Council for Transparent Society (co-chaired by Kim Byeong-sup, president of Seoul National University Council, and chairperson Pak Un Jong of ACRC) to talk about anti-corruption and integrity policy directions.

Public-private Council for Transparent Society (the Council), launched in March this year, is a consultative body consisting of representatives from various sectors of Korean society, including professional associations, the media, and the academia to discuss and propose anti-corruption and integrity policies.

The fifth Council meeting stressed that special activity funds for the National Assembly and government are still inappropriately allocated and executed, causing public distrust in the public sector.

To address the problem, following countermeasures were presented: (a) setting a clear scope of the usage of special activity funds; (b) if necessary, suspending or cutting budget allocated to special activity funds; (c) banning the practice of providing special activity funds in advance; and (d) submitting to the National Assembly a special activity fund execution report and disclosing details of such report; (e) conducting a regular investigation into improper usage of special activity funds.

The Council also proposed a system to designate auditors for public interest corporations, private universities, and public housings, which affect public interests or people’s everyday life.

Under the auditor designation system, a pool of qualified auditors will be formed, from which an independent third party designates an outside auditor objectively, for example, on a random basis. This could enhance the effectiveness of the current auditing system.

Lastly, suggesting the replacement of the term “honorary treatment to former judical officials” with “unfair special treatment to former judical officials“ or ”former judical official irregularities”, the Council presented improvement measures to address unfair privileges to former judical officials.

They included measures to strengthen monitoring on suspicious unfair privilege to former judicial officials as follows: (a) banning retired senior judicial officials from applying for registration as lawyers; (b) extending the period during which lawyers who were senior judicial officials such as judges and prosecutors are prohibited from taking cases handled by the state agency they had worked for (currently 1 year) and adding penalty provisions; (c) adopting a senior judge system that allows retired judges to engage in court affairs using their experiences as judges; and (d) disclosing details of the cases accepted by lawyers who were public officials.

Co-chairing the Council, Mr. Kim Byeong-sup said, “The Council will continue to take the lead in pointing out corruption problems in our society and presenting policy directions that can relate to the public.”