Audit and Inspection Board Faces Delay in Comprehensive Disaster Audit
The Audit and Inspection Board’s plans to commence an audit of the Itaewon disaster at the end of this year have raised concerns of deliberate delay to prevent the release of audit results before the general elections in April next year. The board has refrained from specifically focusing on the Itaewon disaster, instead stating its intention to examine the general response system related to various disasters. This selective approach has sparked controversy, with critics accusing the board of having a political bias in their auditing process.
The Audit and Inspection Board recently convened a meeting of the Audit Committee, the highest decision-making body, to outline their audit plan for the second half of the year. Interestingly, the audit plan includes a ‘disaster management and safety system audit,’ which encompasses issues related to the Itaewon disaster. However, it is worth noting that the board had initially denied any specific plans for this audit, leading to accusations of false information dissemination. The board later clarified their stance, emphasizing their intention to conduct a comprehensive system audit rather than solely focusing on the Itaewon disaster.
The board has scheduled the ‘disaster management and security system audit’ to take place in the fourth quarter of the year, commencing either in October, coinciding with the one-year anniversary of the Itaewon disaster, or in December at the latest. Despite calls from committee members to prioritize the audit of the Itaewon disaster, concerns have been raised about the board’s claims of manpower shortages and the possibility of further delays.
Suspicions of Deliberate Delay
Based on previous precedents, it is highly likely that the results of the Itaewon disaster investigation will only be released following the general election in April next year. In past audits, such as those conducted by the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission and KBS, the results were only unveiled around ten months after the beginning of the investigation. This has led some to question whether the Audit and Inspection Board is intentionally diminishing the significance of the Itaewon disaster audit as part of a broader examination of various disaster response systems in order to delay the timing of the results, thus avoiding their impact on the upcoming election.
The Audit and Inspection Board, as an independent constitutional body, is expected to conduct its duties impartially. However, the director of the board, Choi Jae-hae, has previously stated that the organization supports the president in running the affairs of the state, which has triggered allegations of potential bias.
Furthermore, the board’s approach to the ongoing investigation of the Itaewon disaster has been criticized for its passiveness. Director Choi has claimed that the investigation was still ongoing due to a parallel police inquiry, despite the Special Investigation Headquarters of the National Police Agency concluding its investigation in January. This has raised doubts about the board’s commitment to promptly conducting a thorough audit.
Contrasting Approach to Past Accidents
The Audit and Inspection Board’s handling of the Itaewon disaster differs significantly from its approach to major accidents in the past. For instance, during the Park Geun-hye administration in 2014, the board promptly initiated an audit of the Ministry of Security and Public Administration and the Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, just 13 days after the Sewol ferry disaster. The final audit results, titled ‘Response to the Sewol Ferry Fire Accident and Coastal Passenger Vessel Safety Management and Supervision,’ were presented, even though the audit faced criticism for being influenced by political motives. Notably, this audit played a crucial role in demanding the dismissal of the head of the Korean Coast Guard at the time, Kim Seok-gyun.
Audit and Inspection Board “Comprehensive audit of disasters, not just disasters”… Start Q4, may be delayed
Controversial self-inflicted results ahead of next April’s general election… Potential downsizing and period
It was confirmed on the 3rd that the Audit and Inspection Board had made plans to start an audit of the Itaewon disaster at the end of the year. It is suspected that the audit was deliberately delayed in order to avoid the results of the audit coming out before the general elections in April next year. The Audit and Inspection Board has not yet shown its will to focus its audit on the Itaewon disaster, saying that it will look at the general response system related to various disasters. Although the Audit and Inspection Board is carrying out a swift and comprehensive audit which has not been seen before of the previous government, it is consistently passive about matters for which the current government is responsible, causing controversy about ‘audit’ political’.
On the 30th of last month, the Audit and Inspection Board held a meeting of the Audit Committee, the highest decision-making body, and decided on an audit plan for the second half of this year. As a result of the Kyunghyang Shinmun’s comment, the audit plan for the second half of the year included the same ‘disaster management and safety system audit’ that was included in the annual audit plan decided by the audit committee earlier this year. The Audit and Inspection Board decides on the audit plan for the second half of the year by reflecting the revised issues in the annual audit plan.
The ‘disaster management and safety system audit’ identified as a ‘major audit area’ includes issues relating to the Itaewon disaster which occurred on October 29 last year. The Audit and Inspection Board had previously included the Itaewon disaster audit in the annual audit plan under the same name at the Audit Committee in January, but controversy arose over the false briefing by telling the press, “If there is a specific audit plan (Itaewon disaster), it is not like that.” At the time, some members of the audit committee raised an objection to Choi Jae-hae, head of the Audit and Inspection Board, saying, “Why did you lie in the official brief?” The Audit and Inspection Board issued a press release on the same day and said, “We are not planning to audit the Itaewon disaster alone, but we are preparing a comprehensive system audit plan related to the disaster.” The claim was repeated.
Specifically, it was confirmed that the Audit and Inspection Board had set the ‘disaster management and security system audit’ as a plan for the fourth quarter of the second half. Regardless of how early it is, the examination will begin in October, which is one year since the Itaewon disaster, or December at the latest. Since the establishment of the annual audit plan in January this year, members of the audit committee have requested that an audit of the Itaewon disaster be carried out early, but the date of the audit has been postponed until the end of this year. As the Audit and Inspection Board complains of a lack of manpower in carrying out an extensive audit of Moon Jae-in’s government, concerns are being raised that this could even be delayed.
Judging from the precedent, it is very likely that the results of the Itaewon disaster investigation will only come out after the general election on April 10 next year. In the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission and KBS audits, where the ‘contract audit’ debate was raised, all the results came out about ten months after the start. Some are raising suspicions that the Audit and Inspection Board is trying to reduce the size and status of the Itaewon disaster audit as part of an audit of various disaster response systems, delaying the timing of the audit as long as possible to avoid the release of audit results Itaewon disaster before the general election. It is said that the Audit and Inspection Board, an independent constitutional body, performs its duties according to the government’s taste. Director Choi previously caused controversy by appearing before the National Assembly’s Laws and Judiciary Committee in July last year and said, “The Audit and Inspection Board is an organization that supports the president in running the affairs of the state.”
The Audit and Inspection Board has been passive throughout its investigation of the Itaewon disaster. Director Choi attended a plenary meeting of the National Assembly’s Judiciary and Judiciary Committee in November last year and said that the Itaewon disaster was “under investigation” but that “the National Police Agency is conducting its own investigation and inspection.” It was said that the examination could not be started immediately due to the police investigation.
In the case of the Sewol ferry disaster, thank you in 13 days… It seems difficult to avoid criticism of ‘deliberate delay’
The investigation into the Itaewon disaster by the Special Investigation Headquarters of the National Police Agency has already ended in January. The Audit and Inspection Board conducted an investigation into the shooting of a public official in the West Sea last year at the same time as the prosecution’s investigation, and the National Election Commission’s own investigation of the National Election Commission (NEC), which was recently suspected . preferential hiring of children, the police investigation, the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission investigation, and the National Assembly parliamentary investigation Even in light of the fact that the investigation was forced in the middle of the process, Choi’s comments are not convincing.
The approach of the Audit and Inspection Board is different to some major accidents of the past. In 2014, during the Park Geun-hye administration, the Audit and Inspection Board started an audit of the Ministry of Security and Public Administration and the Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries with 50 people on April 29, 13 days after the Sewol Ar ferry disaster on the 10th of the month, the final results of the audit of ‘Response to the Sewol Ferry Fire Accident and Coastal Passenger Vessel Safety Management and Supervision’ were presented. Although it was criticized as an audit of the Blue House, it was meaningful, such as demanding the dismissal of the head of the Korean Coast Guard at the time Kim Seok-gyun.
#Itaewon #yearend #appreciation.. #Suspicion #political #scrutiny #general #election #mind
