[fn Editorial] The Annual Spectacle of Lining Up Business Leaders at the Parliamentary Inspection Continues

This year’s Parliamentary Inspection of the Administration is expected to see a flood of business leaders summoned as witnesses. Even though the witness selection process for the 17 Standing Committees is not yet complete, the number has already surpassed 190. The final tally will likely far exceed 200 this year. Last year, the number of business leaders called as witnesses reached a record high of 159. Less than a year later, that record is about to be broken again.
There is growing concern about the intentions of lawmakers who select business leaders as witnesses for the Parliamentary Inspection of the Administration. Last year, business leaders accounted for about half of the roughly 370 total witnesses. The issues addressed during the inspection span politics, the economy, society, and culture. Yet, it is questionable that business leaders make up half of all witnesses. This only highlights the narrow focus and lack of preparation among committee members.
Many of these business leaders are summoned only for the proceedings to end inconclusively. Last year, some business leaders appeared at the inspection but returned home without being asked a single question. Forcing them to attend, only to use them as mere bystanders, is open to criticism. At this point, it seems that the purpose of summoning business leaders is not to seek necessary testimony, but rather to use them as tools for public shaming.
The criteria for selecting witnesses are also questionable. Chung Eui-sun, Chairman of Hyundai Motor, is reportedly being summoned over a labor protest at a subsidiary, while Chung Yong-jin, Chairman of Shinsegae, is being called regarding consumer data protection issues at a Chinese joint venture. It is hard to understand why group chairmen must personally appear at the inspection to explain such matters. These issues could easily be addressed by relevant executives or department heads, so one must question the real intent behind summoning the top executives.
Forcing business leaders with busy schedules to attend leads to absurd situations. Chey Tae-won, Chairman of SK Group, is required to appear at the inspection on the opening day of the APEC CEO Summit, which falls on the 28th. He is the chair of the official side events for the APEC Economic Leaders' Meeting (APEC Summit). Is it truly reasonable to summon him to the inspection on the day of such a major national event?
The Parliamentary Inspection of the Administration is a constitutional authority to oversee the government and review state affairs. This power, entrusted by the people, should not be used to control business leaders or as a tool for political grandstanding. Arbitrarily summoning business leaders as witnesses and later dismissing the matter cannot be justified.
Moreover, we are now in an era of intense global economic competition. Due to changes in the United States (U.S.) tariff policies, Korean companies are at a crossroads for survival. The government must rely on the support of businesses to overcome these challenges. Is it right to tie up 200 business leaders at the inspection when they are fighting desperately to open new markets?
The annual competition to increase the number of witnesses and the practice of summoning business leaders must end. The National Assembly, which claims to champion the people's livelihood, should not hinder the economy. Lawmakers should carefully select only those business leaders who are truly necessary as witnesses and focus on addressing pressing issues that matter to the public.