The fate of the Democratic Party depends on 28 votes

Lee Jae-myung’s empty seat: Park Kwang-on, floor leader of the Democratic Party of Korea, gazes at the empty seat of party leader Lee Jae-myung, who was hospitalized while engaging in a hunger strike, at a meeting of the party’s Supreme Council in the National Assembly on September 20. Bak Min-gyu, Senior Reporter

On September 20, a day before lawmakers were scheduled to vote on the arrest motion for Lee Jae-myung, leader of the Democratic Party of Korea, the National Assembly was once again put to the “bulletproof” test. Lee abandoned his pledge to give up his privilege from arrest and asked his party legislators to reject the arrest motion. The Democratic Party pledged to part with appeals to emotions in a general meeting of lawmakers on reforms in May, but they have yet to completely escape from the controversy of “bulletproofing” Lee Jae-myung.

On Wednesday, a day before the National Assembly’s vote on his arrest motion, Lee gave what was practically an instruction to his party lawmakers to reject the motion.

The party held an emergency meeting of lawmakers and discussed their response to the motion. Over thirty lawmakers requested to speak, leading to a fierce debate. Pro-Lee Jae-myung legislators argued that they, as a party, should reject the motion claiming that they should come together to fight against a reckless Prosecution Service. Lawmakers who didn’t support Lee argued that Lee should keep his pledge to abandon his privilege from arrest. Kim Jong-min, a legislator who is not a Lee supporter, met with reporters and said, “If we decide to reject the motion as a party, we will be dragging everyone into the ‘bulletproof’ mess.” Lee So-young, the party’s spokesperson on the floor, announced that in the end they “decided that although rejecting the motion is the appropriate thing to do, we will not set it as a party policy.”

The result of the vote on the arrest motion will be determined by how many “shy” votes will be cast from the Democratic Party. If about thirty of the 167 Democratic Party lawmakers vote in favor of the motion, the motion can pass. The National Assembly can pass an arrest motion when more than half of the lawmakers present vote in favor of the motion, with more than half of the registered lawmakers present. Currently, there are 297 legislators, and 149 will form a majority. When we assume that lawmakers of the People Power Party (111), the Justice Party (6), and independent lawmakers with PPP tendencies (2), lawmaker Cho Jung-hun of Transition Korea, and lawmaker Yang Hyang-ja of Hope of Korea are all present and vote in favor of the arrest motion, they will make up 121 votes. Therefore, if 28 of the Democratic Party lawmakers vote in favor of the motion, they will form a majority of 149 votes.

When the National Assembly voted on the first arrest motion for Lee in February, at least 31 Democratic Party lawmakers voted in favor of the motion. More lawmakers voted in favor of (139) than against (138) the motion, but nine abstained and eleven votes were invalid. Thus the votes in favor of the motion failed to form a majority and the motion was rejected. About ten of the twenty lawmakers who abstained or cast invalid votes at the time must vote in favor of the motion for it to pass this time.

The outcome is uncertain. Sympathy for Lee, who has been on a hunger strike for 21 days as of Thursday, is a factor adding weight to a rejection. One legislator representing a district in the Honam region said, “The prosecutors’ investigation is so coercive, the lawmakers have generally turned toward rejecting the motion.” Lawmakers with party primaries for the next year’s parliamentary election approaching also have to please the party’s diehard supporters, a situation that also encourages them to reject the motion.

However, there were mixed prospects on what impact Lee’s last-minute appeal would actually have. One first-time legislator said, “Since Lee asked us to reject the motion, I think the overall opinion of lawmakers will move toward rejecting it.” One veteran lawmaker said, “Lee should have at least remained silent or if he had to give a message, he should have asked lawmakers to vote in favor of the motion,” and added, “I’m afraid Lee’s appeal for us to reject the motion will actually lead to the National Assembly passing it.”

Regardless of the outcome of the vote, Lee and the Democratic Party will suffer a significant blow. If the motion is accepted, Lee will be critically hit; if rejected, the Democratic Party will suffer. Now that Lee has urged lawmakers to reject the motion, he has turned the vote on his arrest motion into a vote of confidence for Lee as the party leader. If the motion passes, Lee’s leadership will collapse and there will be intense debates on his future actions. The Democratic Party will inevitably be caught up in serious internal strife.

But if the motion is rejected, Lee may win the vote of confidence, but he will have to be accountable for his “bulletproofing” hunger strike and his breaking of the pledge to give up his privilege from arrest. Lee could see the crash of his credibility, difficult to recover after it’s lost, in exchange for evading an arrest. The Democratic Party’s image as a party with double standards will also become more vivid.