[ED] Lee's inclusive Cabinet: Right idea, wrong people

President Lee Jae Myung’s inclusive Cabinet is being criticized as flawed because several nominees have faced ethics and qualification questions. Justice Minister nominee Kim Seung-won and Gender Equality Minister nominee Yong Hye-in are under pressure to withdraw, while the editorial says the screening process has also fallen short. It argues that diversity in appointments will not work unless appointees can speak frankly and fit their posts.

Of the six Cabinet nominees mentioned, two — Justice Minister nominee Kim Seung-won and Gender Equality Minister nominee Yong Hye-in — are said to be under mounting pressure to bow out.

Kim Seung-won is accused of lobbying the food and drug safety administrator in October 2021 to expedite biotech startup Genencell’s request for clinical trials of a COVID-19 drug.

Yong Hye-in is being criticized for refusing to give up her parliamentary seat if she is appointed to the Cabinet.

The editorial says President Lee nominated Lee Hye-hoon to lead the Ministry of Planning and Budget on Dec. 28 last year, then withdrew the nomination a month later after scandals surfaced.

Lee Seok-yeon said in a Sept. 3 statement that President Lee seemed uncomfortable with constructive criticism and that he had been asked to step down after urging the president to distance himself from the DPK and focus on state affairs.

Published Sep 6, 2026 1:12 pm KST

Updated Sep 6, 2026 1:28 pm KST

Lee's open-door policy needs better vetting

Rep. Yong Hye-in, right, ignores reporters asking questions on Sept. 3. An activist, left, holds a sign which reads "Partisan interests first? Rep. Yong doesn't deserve a Cabinet post." Yonhap

There is a Korean saying that reminds leaders of the importance of putting the right people in the right positions: “Personnel is everything.”

In reality, however, filling key posts with qualified and suitable people seems to be much trickier than it sounds. Previous Korean presidents have repeatedly struggled with this. They have often eroded their own credibility by nominating people whose qualifications or ethics were questionable.

President Lee Jae Myung is no exception. His recent Cabinet reshuffle has become a disaster. Of the six nominees, two — Justice Minister nominee Kim Seung-won and Gender Equality Minister nominee Yong Hye-in — are under mounting pressure to bow out.

Kim, a National Assembly legislator of the ruling Democratic Party of Korea (DPK), is accused of having lobbied the food and drug safety administrator in October 2021 to expedite biotech startup Genencell’s request to conduct clinical trials of its COVID-19 drug. The request was approved two weeks after Kim sent a text message to the administrator. The incident has since prompted allegations that Kim abused his power and violated the Anti-Graft Act.

Yong, a member of the minor Basic Income Party who won her seat in a proportional representation race, is under attack from both liberals and conservatives for refusing to give up her parliamentary seat in the event that she is appointed to the Cabinet.

Self-serving politicians appear to be taking advantage of Lee’s open-door policy.

Compared with his predecessors, Lee has been open-minded in selecting candidates for public office. He appointed Kwon Oh-eul, a former conservative lawmaker, as minister of patriots and veterans affairs. He also made the bold decision to retain the agriculture minister appointed by his predecessor Yoon Suk Yeol, rather than replace her.

On Dec. 28 last year, Lee nominated Lee Hye-hoon, another conservative politician, to lead the Ministry of Planning and Budget. He withdrew the nomination a month later as the nominee was found to have been implicated in several serious scandals.

President Lee’s effort to create an inclusive Cabinet that listens to and reflects the voices of his opponents is laudable. It distinguishes his leadership from that of his predecessors, who predominantly favored like-minded people when making appointments to key government posts.

Although Lee’s intentions are good, his selections for key posts have not necessarily produced the desired results.

Some of Lee’s picks have quit before, during or after their confirmation hearings, highlighting flaws in the screening process that come before the nominees are publicly unveiled. It is also questionable whether those who have survived the process are living up to expectations by offering constructive criticism that could help the Lee administration succeed.

If they remain silent when they are expected to speak up, or fail to challenge the administration when it goes too far, what kind of change can such an inclusive Cabinet actually bring?

An inclusive Cabinet can bear fruit only when internal critics feel free to speak up. Unfortunately, the Lee administration does not appear to be particularly tolerant of those who hold views different from those of the government.

Lee Seok-yeon, the outgoing chairman of the Presidential Committee on National Cohesion, said President Lee appeared to feel uncomfortable whenever he offered constructive criticism.

In a statement released on Sept. 3, he said his humble wish was for President Lee to implement some of the recommendations he had made since assuming the post last year. “What I had said may have sounded rude to the president, but despite this, I had to do it,” he said.

Over the past year, he showed himself to be a rare appointee willing to risk his career by speaking frankly to the president whenever he believed the administration was heading in the wrong direction. In a recent MBC News program, Lee urged the president to distance himself from the DPK and focus fully on state affairs, saying that the president bears responsibility for the current mess.

The presidential office appeared uncomfortable with the outspoken chairman. According to Lee Seok-yeon, he was asked to step down and complied.

If dissenting views are not welcomed, President Lee has little reason to pursue an inclusive Cabinet. Appointing people from outside the ruling party for Cabinet positions is a commendable attempt at diversity. But this open-door policy will not achieve its intended goals if the administration fails to uphold the principle of putting the right people in the right positions.

李在明总统的包容性内阁因多位提名人选面临道德和资格质疑而受到批评。法务部长官提名人金承元和性别平等部长官提名人李铉惠仁面临退出压力，社论指出，遴选程序也存在缺陷。社论认为，除非被任命者能够坦诚发言并胜任其职位，否则任命多元化将无法奏效。

在提到的六位内阁提名人选中，有两位——法务部长提名人金承元和性别平等部长提名人龙惠仁——据说面临着越来越大的压力，要求他们退出。

金承元被指控于 2021 年 10 月游说食品药品安全管理局，以加快生物技术初创公司 Genencell 的 COVID-19 药物临床试验申请。

杨惠仁因拒绝在被任命为内阁成员后放弃国会议员席位而受到批评。

社论称，李登辉总统于去年12月28日提名李惠勋担任计划预算部部长，但一个月后，在丑闻曝光后撤回了提名。

李锡渊在9月3日的一份声明中表示，李登辉总统似乎对建设性批评感到不自在，在他敦促总统与民主进步党保持距离并专注于国家事务后，被要求辞职。

发布于2026年9月6日下午1:12（韩国标准时间）

更新于2026年9月6日下午1:28（韩国标准时间）

李的门户开放政策需要更严格的审查

9月3日，韩国众议员杨惠仁（右）无视记者提问。一名活动人士（左）举着一块牌子，上面写着：“党派利益至上？杨惠仁议员不配担任内阁职务。”（韩联社）

韩国有一句谚语提醒领导者，让合适的人担任合适的职位至关重要：“人事决定一切。”

然而，实际上，为关键职位找到合格且合适的人选远比听起来要困难得多。韩国历任总统都曾为此苦恼。他们常常因为提名一些资格或道德有问题的人而损害自身的信誉。

李在明总统也不例外。他最近的内阁改组以失败告终。六位提名人选中，有两位——法务部长官提名人金承元和性别平等部长官提名人李铉惠——面临着越来越大的压力，被迫退出。

韩国执政党共同民主党国会议员金某被指控于2021年10月游说食品药品安全管理局局长，以加快生物科技初创公司Genencell开展其新冠肺炎药物临床试验的申请。金某向局长发送短信两周后，该申请即获批准。此事引发了对金某滥用职权和违反《反贪污法》的指控。

杨女士是小党“基本收入党”的成员，她在比例代表制选举中赢得议席。她因拒绝在被任命为内阁成员后放弃议员席位而受到自由派和保守派的共同抨击。

一些自私自利的政客似乎正在利用李光耀的门户开放政策。

与前任相比，李明博在选择公职人员方面更加开明。他任命前保守派议员权五乙担任爱国者和退伍军人事务部长官。他还做出了一个大胆的决定，保留了前任尹锡烈任命的农业部长官，而不是更换人选。

去年12月28日，李明博提名另一位保守派政治人物李惠勋担任计划预算部部长。一个月后，由于李惠勋被发现卷入多起严重丑闻，李明博撤回了提名。

李总统努力组建一个包容各方的内阁，倾听并反映反对者的声音，这种做法值得称赞。这使他的领导风格区别于他的前任们，他的前任们在任命关键政府职位时，大多倾向于选择与自己理念相近的人。

虽然李的初衷是好的，但他对关键职位的人选未必能达到预期的效果。

李的一些提名人选在确认听证会之前、期间或之后辞职，这凸显了提名人选公开公布前的筛选程序存在缺陷。此外，那些通过筛选的人选是否能不负众望，提出有助于李政府取得成功的建设性批评，也令人质疑。

如果他们在应该发声的时候保持沉默，或者在政府做得太过分的时候不去质疑政府，那么这样一个包容各方的内阁究竟能带来什么样的改变呢？

只有当内部批评者能够自由表达意见时，一个包容性的内阁才能取得成效。不幸的是，李光耀政府似乎对那些持有与政府不同观点的人并不宽容。

即将卸任的总统国家凝聚力委员会委员长李锡渊表示，每当他提出建设性批评时，李登辉总统似乎都会感到不自在。

他在9月3日发表的声明中表示，他衷心希望李总统能够落实他自去年上任以来提出的一些建议。“我之前说的话或许对总统来说有些冒犯，但即便如此，我还是得这么做。”他说道。

过去一年，他展现出罕见的勇气，敢于在认为政府方向错误时直言不讳地向总统提出批评，从而冒着职业生涯的风险。在最近一期MBC新闻节目中，李光耀敦促总统与民主党保持距离，全力专注于国家事务，并表示总统应对当前的混乱局面负有责任。

总统府似乎对这位直言不讳的会长感到不安。据李锡渊透露，他被要求辞职，并且照做了。

如果异议不​​受欢迎，李显龙总统就没有理由推行包容性内阁。任命执政党以外的人士担任内阁职务，是实现多元化的可贵尝试。但如果政府不能坚持“人尽其才”的原则，这项开放政策就无法达到预期目标。