Lawmakers Visit Itaewon a Month after the Launch of the Special Committee for a Parliamentary Inquiry and “Rebuke” the Police

A special committee for the parliamentary inquiry into the Itaewon crowd crush conducts a field investigation at the Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency in Jongno-gu, Seoul on December 21. National Assembly press photographers

A special committee for the parliamentary inquiry into the Itaewon crowd crush conducted the first field investigation on December 21. The inspection took place nearly a month after the committee was launched to uncover the truth and to prevent similar disasters on November 24 and 54 days after the crowd crush in Itaewon.

On Wednesday, the ruling and opposition party lawmakers on the special committee conducted the first field inspection, visiting the public memorial altar at Noksapyeong Station, the alley next to the Hamilton Hotel where the crowd crush occurred, the Itaewon Patrol Unit, the Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency, and Seoul City Hall. The victims’ families cried throughout the field investigation. The bereaved families wearing red scarves wept and shouted, “Parliamentary Inquiry! Uncover the Truth!” One family member said, “Why don’t they apologize after doing something they should be sorry for. The ruling party, the opposition party, I hate them all. They need to clearly uncover the truth.”

The ruling and opposition party members of the committee focused their questions on the police and checked to see if the police response was appropriate when they were at the Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency. In the process, they uncovered the lack of awareness among the senior police officials. When People Power Party (PPP) lawmaker Jun Joo-hyae asked, “Why didn’t anyone at the Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency think about reporting to Commissioner Kim Kwang-ho when a Code Zero (highest emergency level) was issued at 21:00 (on the day of the crowd crush)?” Bak Gyu-seok, the director of the 112 public safety monitoring room at the Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency, said, “In our monitoring office, we had no idea that the situation was serious.” Kim Kwang-ho, chief of the Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency also said, “From what I know, it was never reported to the head of the monitoring office or to Ryu Mi-jin, the senior monitoring officer, and I never received a report before I got off work that day.”

Lawmaker Jun said, “The victims’ families are here today, and it doesn’t make sense that you were not aware of the situation,” and cried, “You are only admitting the fact that the 112 monitoring office at the police agency was neglecting its duties.”

Democratic Party of Korea lawmaker Lee Hae-sik mentioned the police manual on how to respond to a 112 report and pointed out that they should have “shared (send out the call allowing others to listen to the report)” the report on the day of the accident.

Both ruling and opposition party lawmakers asked why the police did not think the reports were of the same incident despite that they received eleven calls from locations nearby after the first report at 6:34 p.m. Bak said, “When several people make reports from similar areas, we can see them as reports of the same case, but since they (officers in the monitoring office) received the calls individually, we did not know that they were referring to the same case.” Bak explained that after the crowd crush, the police updated the system so that when they receive three or more consecutive reports from areas that lie within a 50m radius in one hour, the cases will be marked.

A special committee for the parliamentary inquiry into the Itaewon crowd crush visits the site of the Halloween crowd crush in Itaewon, Yongsan-gu, Seoul and listens to a briefing by Choi Seong-beom, chief of the Yongsan Fire Station, on December 21. National Assembly press photographers

Democratic Party lawmaker Woo Sang-ho, who chairs the special committee, said, “We confirmed that the police officer who went to the Itaewon Patrol Unit and tried to control the scene felt the urgency of the situation and took several actions, but when we examined the offices higher up in the line of command, we found their judgment of the situation to be laidback.” Woo continued and said, “Basically, the system should deliver the urgency on the field to the commander so that he can take action. I feel devastated just by confirming the fact that this was not the way the system worked.”

When the lawmakers inspected Seoul City Hall, the ruling and opposition party lawmakers engaged in a war of nerves on whether or not Seoul Mayor Oh Se-hoon properly played his part as the “control tower.”

Democratic Party lawmaker Oh Yeong-hwan asked Mayor Oh, “According to the Framework Act on the Management of Disasters and Safety, when there is a large number of casualties, the mayor can request mobilization and designate a danger zone. Did you take such measures?” Mayor Oh answered, “I received the first report in the Netherlands around 11:20 a.m. and mentioned everything that you just said when speaking on the phone with the first vice mayor, the second vice mayor, and the head of the Seoul Metropolitan Fire & Disaster Headquarters in order.”

PPP lawmaker Park Seong-min said, “I served as a district mayor for eight years, and the district mayor takes on the responsibility as the head of the disaster headquarters and conducts the duties on the field. But I hardly have any memories of reporting such incidents to the city mayor and receiving separate instructions from him.”

The special committee will conduct a second field inspection and visit the Yongsan-gu Office and the Ministry of the Interior and Safety on December 23.