BAI looks away from the Itaewon disaster and drives victims’ families out onto the street

Victims’ families cry as soon as the Yongsan-gu district mayor, Park Hee-young, released on bail after being arrested and charged for negligence in handling the Itaewon crowd crush, left following a speedy trial at the Seoul Western District Court on June 26. Yonhap News

The Board of Audit and Inspection (BAI) has not launched a probe into the Itaewon crowd crush for nearly six months since the Council of Commissioners decided to conduct an audit in January. Meanwhile, a string of middle officials responsible for the disaster have been released on bail, and the prosecutor’s investigation on higher-ranking officials responsible for the disaster is at a standstill.

An audit by the Board of Audit and Inspection has been a constant demand by the bereaved families of the Itaewon crowd crush victims. A special bill on the Itaewon disaster jointly proposed by 183 legislators on April 20 mentions the establishment of a special investigation committee--an independent body to investigate the Itaewon disaster--support for victims and funding to establish a memorial foundation. In particular, the special investigation committee should be composed of seven people with the authority to hold a public hearing to uncover the truth, to issue orders for the submission of information and orders to proceed, to file a complaint, and to request an investigation and audit.

In May, five ministries--the BAI, the Ministry of the Interior and Safety, the Ministry of Employment and Labor, the Ministry of Health and Welfare, and the Ministry of Personnel Management--submitted a written opinion to the National Assembly expressing their opposition to the major details of the special act. The interior ministry said that the nature and functions of the special committee overlapped with existing administrative agencies and argued that the establishment of the committee should be restricted. The Board of Audit and Inspection argued that the special committee’s authority to request an audit by the BAI posed the risk of infringing the Board’s independence, and that it was also inappropriate according to the system of law.

The efforts to identify responsibility by law enforcement agencies like the police and the Prosecution Service have also fallen short. So far, all six people who were arrested and charged for their responsibilities in the Itaewon crowd crush have requested bail and four have already been released. They are Park Hee-young, district mayor of Yongsan, Seoul; Choi Won-jun, former chief of the safety and disaster division in the Yongsan-gu office; Park Sung-min, former director of intelligence on public peace and security and foreign affairs in the Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency; and Kim Jin-ho, former director of intelligence at the Yongsan Police Station. A hearing for Lee Im-jae, former chief of the Yongsan Police Station, is scheduled for this coming June 30. A date has yet to be set for the bail review of Song Byung-joo, former chief of the 112 situation room at the Yongsan Police Station.

The prosecutor’s investigation into higher ranking officials also seems likely to come up empty. In the case of Kim Kwang-ho, the chief of the Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency and the official with the ultimate responsibility among those charged, the Seoul Western District Prosecutors’ Office advised the prosecutor to request an arrest warrant for death and injury by occupational negligence, but the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office reportedly rejected the recommendation claiming that a lot of time has passed and that it was unnecessary to physically detain Kim.

The bereaved families of the Itaewon crowd crush victims have been engaging in a hunger strike calling for the legislators to enact the special bill since June 20. Yun Bok-nam, head of a task force on the October 29 disaster at Lawyers for a Democratic Society said, “To prevent such a disaster from recurring and to improve the system, an investigation by a government agency should be conducted in addition to the investigations in the criminal procedure. But the Board of Audit and Inspection, which reviews the legitimacy of the tasks conducted by civil servants, shows no will to engage in such activities.” He argued, “The BAI has practically given up exercising its authority to keep the executive branch in check as an independent constitutional institution.”