[Editorial] Tragic comedy

While the political arena is touch-and-go over the Korea-U.S. FTA bill, an independent lawmaker is creating a farce by suing a comedian for defaming lawmakers in general in a popular TV program.

Rep. Kang Yong-suk, 41, elected from Mapo, Seoul, has a convoluted reason for filing a criminal complaint with the Seoul prosecution against Choe Hyo-jong last week. The legal action came immediately after he was found guilty of “collective libel” by the Seoul Appellate Court for his remarks concerning women TV announcers. Kang faced criminal charges after the daily JoongAng Ilbo reported he told a group of collegians that “an anchorwoman has to offer everything she has” to get the job, implying sexual bribery.

After the appeals court conviction, Kang, a former lawyer who studied at Harvard Law School, contended in his blog that the verdict contradicted Supreme Court precedents. He argued that if he was really guilty of libel, then Choe, who had recently satirized lawmakers should also be charged and convicted.

“Shall I charge him for defaming National Assemblymen and see what happens?” he asked. It was not a joke, however. He submitted his complaints against Choe with the Seoul Nambu (South) Prosecutors’ Office Friday.

Kang’s action touched off a spate of criticism from political as well as entertainment circles. A supporters’ group for the comedian was quickly formed online; a fellow comedian offered to pay the fine that could be imposed on Choe if convicted; and other colleagues advised him to run for the National Assembly in the elections next April from the constituency of Kang, who was expelled from the Grand National Party in August.

Anyone with some common sense must know that Kang’s case was hardly comparable with Choe’s. Choe drew wild applause from a live audience when he joked about becoming a lawmaker on the ruling party ticket. All an aspirant needs to win an Assembly seat, he suggested, is to get the party nomination by becoming intimate with its leader, go to a market and shake hands with vendor women and eat a bowl of soup and rice there just once.

Choe’s joke amused even lawmakers, maybe excluding Kang, who is now making a mockery of the legal system. The Assemblyman himself recognized in his blog that the comedian he quoted was not criminally punishable, but he eventually filed a suit against him in a clear act of self-contradiction.

Kang is an embarrassment to fellow Assemblymen, legal professionals, his alumni and to his constituents, many of whom should by now regret that they chose him in 2008. It is additionally regrettable that Kang’s indiscretion came at a time when partisan confrontation over the KORUS FTA bill raised public disenchantment with politicians to its limit.

In the National Assembly, a different style of comedy, or rather a tragic comedy, is being staged amidst the volatile contest between rival parties. The Democratic Party’s Sohn Hak-kyu and Chung Dong-young are saying exactly the opposite of what they had remarked four years ago about the Korea-U.S. FTA which the Roh Moo-hyun administration had signed with the United States.

The two men, as leading associates of President Roh, hailed the FTA as a historic achievement. Another actor is GNP chairman Hong Joon-pyo, who, as an opposition leader in 2007, raised questions about the “ISD (investor-state dispute)” clause in the bilateral pact, the focal point in today’s FTA showdown.

People’s disgust grows to the extreme when they watch the videos on Internet sites showing the “before” and “after” contrasts of these politicians shifting from full support to outright rejection and vice versa about the one and same KORUS FTA.