Democratic Party's Jeonbuk Chapter Nomination Process Under Fire for Lack of Clarity

The Democratic Party's Jeonbuk Provincial Chapter is embroiled in controversy over a lack of consistency in its proportional representation application process and an evasion of its accountability to explain. The chapter reopened the proportional representative application process in April, following a preliminary candidate qualification review in January, revealing a procedural dual structure. This has led to calls for explanations regarding candidate pool inclusion, the scope of allowing new applications, and the criteria applied. The current controversy is focused on the lack of clarity in the process and the provincial chapter's failure to adequately explain its actions, rather than the outcome of the proportional representation applications themselves.

Newstoday submitted written inquiries to the Jeonbuk Provincial Chapter on the 10th, requesting confirmation of facts regarding the relationship between the January qualification review and the April application, the allowance and criteria for new applications, and the operation of application fees. In an initial interview, the Jeonbuk Provincial Chapter explained the January preliminary candidate qualification review and the April proportional representative application as separate procedures, referring to the preliminary review as a 'qualification check' and the application period as part of the 'nomination process'.

However, in a follow-up phone call with Newstoday on the 11th, an official from the Jeonbuk Provincial Chapter responded to the 14-point questionnaire by stating, "We cannot comment as it is internal work," and added, "We would need to search and study." The chapter also has a history of requesting written inquiries, refusing to answer questions about whether candidates Kim Soo-min and Jung Seung-in were former aides to lawmakers, and instead asking to be questioned only on factual matters. With criticism mounting over the provincial chapter blocking answers without sufficient clarification, its response method is being highlighted as problematic.