When allegations of corruption surrounding the nation’s highest authority and their spouse rock the country, what was the role of the ruling party? The People Power Party (PPP) cannot escape criticism that it long remained silent regarding the failures of the Presidential Office and the opaque activities of First Lady Kim Keon Hee, effectively condoning their "playing king." In a situation where they are now raising their voices, having consistently maintained silence and abandoned their duty to check power, it prompts a fundamental question: By what right can they now discuss the current predicament?
The PPP acted as a shield whenever criticism was directed at the President and the First Lady, turning a blind eye to truth investigation and fair scrutiny. Under the stigma of being a patron force of power, they neglected their ethical responsibilities and their duty of loyalty to the people, which are heavier than any party platform. When the highest authority exhibited all manner of privileges and abnormal behavior in the private sphere, the ruling party's job was not one of 'unconditional defense,' but one of 'internal critic.' However, under the pretext of 'protecting the President,' they willingly forfeited the monitoring authority delegated by the people.
Watching the PPP begin to speak out about issues belatedly raised after a long period of silence, an old Korean proverb comes to mind: "A dog stained with feces scolds a dog stained with bran." Despite having committed the greater error of closing their eyes and ears to the allegations of power abuse, their current attempt to point out smaller issues and claim moral superiority is perceived as a shameless act. The public finds no sincerity in their un-self-reflective outcries. Their silence was like the feces that sanctioned the power cartel, and raising their voice now is merely the act of brushing off a small speck of bran.
If the PPP wishes to overcome this crisis and regain the public's trust, the first thing they must do is not criticize others, but engage in a thorough self-reflection internally. They must acknowledge that their past silence was an act of blind obedience to power and humbly apologize for the resulting national confusion. Unless they face the painful past of having condoned the 'playing king,' any outcry from the PPP will remain an empty echo. Faced with the historical responsibility of failing to act as the monitor of power, what they need is not the sword of criticism, but the deep contemplation of repentance.
[Copyright (c) Global Economic Times. All Rights Reserved.]
