Page 15 - Election Fraud in Korea-ENG-KOR

For prosecutors to investigate, they need a search warrant to gather the evidence, but the
court would likely have blocked granting the warrant due to the conflict of interest between
South Korean Supreme Court and the NEC, as explained earlier.
Meanwhile, the Democratic Party of Korea won the April 2020 and April 2024 General
Elections in landslides unheard of in Korean history, effectively gaining control of the
National Assembly and its lawmaking capacity. Yet after both elections, it did not celebrate
its huge victories, but remained solemn-faced and absolutely mum in response to election
fraud allegations. Since then, the DP passed thousands of laws, including laws criminalizing
those who send leaflet balloons to North Korea and those who mention North Korean special
forces’ involvement in Gwangju in May 1980, both these laws suppress freedom of speech,
which is guaranteed by the constitution.

Former Prime Minister Hwang Kyo Ahn said, “The reason why opposition lawmakers are
able to do whatever they want at the National Assembly despite being substandard is
because they were elected through fraudulent elections,” and added that “The record of
election fraud remains intact at the NEC.”

The head of NIS who reported the results of the inspection, Kim Kyu-Hyun, and who had
predicted fraud in April 2024 National Assembly election was fired after issuing the report
on the NEC, for unknown reasons.

NEC and the Judiciary – Obstructing Election Integrity Efforts or ‘Aiding
and Abetting’ Electoral Fraud?

In any country with a legitimate electoral system, the National Election Commission (or its
equivalent) plays an indispensable role in ensuring the sanctity of the electoral system. And
the judiciary – ideally honest and independent – buttresses efforts by citizens, civil society
groups, and even the government to ensure a clean electoral process.

In South Korea, however, some observers note that the NEC has become a law unto itself,
seemingly uninterested in election integrity. Or even worse, complicit by action or inaction in
subverting South Korea’s hard earned electoral process.
NEC has a history of refusing external audits by the Board of Audit and Inspection. It claims
to conduct its own internal audits. And lawmakers are reluctant to confront the NEC.
Even raising the issue of possible ‘election irregularities’, much less ‘fraud’, in South Korea
opens one up to a lawsuit and punishment – given NEC aggressive defense of its ‘ownership’
of elections in South Korea. And until recently, you’d also get a damaging label as an ‘election
denier’ or conspiracy ‘nut’.
The NEC has also been revealed to be the entity that most frequently has pressured Facebook
to remove posts and sanctions users – reportedly for mentioning electoral fraud. YouTube
has similarly been in the NEC’s crosshairs and channels claiming (often with clear evidence)
that South Korea’s electoral system has problems have been shut down.
Normally, a nation’s judiciary will rein in the electoral commission or its equivalent, and
serve to ensure the integrity of electoral processes, systems, and procedures.
However, in South Korea this generally does not appear to be the case in recent times.
Besides both the NEC and the judiciary reportedly being highly politicized, the NEC and the
courts have very close, almost incestuous, ties.
For starters, the chairman of the NEC is always a Supreme Court judge. During the Moon
Jae-In era and at the time of the 2020 National Assembly election the chairman of the NEC
was a close friend of President Moon.

-9-