|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Troll_Bait
Joined: 04 Jan 2006
Location: [T]eaching experience doesn't matter much. -Lee Young-chan (pictured)
|
 Posted: Thu Sep 06, 2007 7:27 pm Post subject: President Noh sues Lee Myung-bak for libel |
 |
|
http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/opinon/2007/09/202_9688.html
| Quote: |
Libel Suit
Presidential Office Must Refrain From Going Too Far
The presidential office has decided to launch a legal battle against the presidential candidate of the main opposition Grand National Party (GNP). The office plans to file a libel suit against GNP candidate Lee Myung-bak on Friday, claiming that he has spread false allegations about Cheong Wa Dae's involvement in political surveillance of him. Such a suit is unprecedented in South Korea. It is regrettable that the litigation is instigating political confrontation just ahead of the Dec. 19 presidential election.
Presidential chief of staff Moon Jae-in said Wednesday that the legal step is in response to Lee's allegedly groundless statement that Cheong Wa Dae was behind a recent plot to foil the opposition candidate's presidential ambitions. Lee and three other GNP members might face libel charges. Lee has made allegations that the presidential office mobilized government agencies, including the National Intelligence Service (NIS) and the National Tax Service (NTS), to raise suspicions about his wealth and property transactions.
We must express serious concerns about the lawsuit because it is not usual and comes only about 100 days before the December poll. Most people want to see presidential contenders from both governing and opposition camps play fair during the campaign period. They also hope that the government and its agencies will make the utmost effort to make sure that the upcoming poll will be fair and clean.
There is no doubt that the libel suit will only serve as a stumbling block to a fair election because it is apparently designed to have a negative influence on the campaign trail. The legal battle might be seen as a crackdown on the opposition candidate or a dog-eat-dog partisan struggle between President Roh Moo-hyun and his political archrival Lee. We have to reiterate that the public is already fed up with such outdated political maneuvering, party politics and vendettas.
People long for a turnabout in politics which will bring forth a new vision for the nation's future prosperity based on mutual respect and reconciliation. All the politicians, including President Roh, should realize they cannot lead the country any more with anachronistic ideologies, outdated leadership styles and political skullduggery. They urgently need a paradigm shift to usher in a new political culture in the 21st century so that they can bring hope and courage to the people.
Voters applauded the final primary race of the GNP last month when the conservative party chose Lee as its candidate, while his rival Park Geun-hye humbly accepted the nomination results. The public harbored doubts that Park might have refused to admit defeat, considering the smear campaign between the two contenders. Lee and his supporters have often criticized the nation's spy agency and the tax office for illegally collecting information about his assets and real estate deals and disclosing them to get him into trouble.
In this situation, Lee has gone so far as to claim that the presidential office has masterminded political maneuvering against him. It seems that his claim is aimed at stopping the Roh administration from exercising influence on the election to frustrate his presidential bid. Some experts said that Lee's allegations against Cheong Wa Dae might not be judged libel, given the nation's political culture based on widespread slandering and deep-rooted partisan struggles. Even a spokesman of the pro-government United New Democratic Party expressed concerns that the legal action may cause unnecessary disruption on the road to the election.
President Roh received two warnings from the National Election Commission in June, which ruled that he violated the law calling for his political neutrality in elections by criticizing Lee and Park and their campaign pledges. Some lawyers and civic group members have threatened to call for criminal charges against Roh for the violation if his office presses ahead with the litigation against Lee. The GNP has also vowed to fight Roh by conducting a parliamentary investigation into the presidential office's alleged involvement in the plot against Lee. We are worried that such political deadlock might cause grave consequences to the nation. We urge Roh and his political rivals to restrain themselves from going too far. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
jinju
Joined: 22 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 06, 2007 7:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| And then Lee will get into power, have immunity and will destroy Roh. Hopefully some really indepth investigations into what went on over the last 5 to 10 years will take place. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 06, 2007 8:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
My question would be does Roh's suit have a chance?
In the States, defamatory speech against a public official is priviliged so long as its directed towards the public official's fitness for office. For example, if I call George Bush 'corrupt' and 'a bad leader,' this is privilged speech. If I say, "George Bush likes goat porn," then I would be liable for defamation. Even so, the burden of proof would be on the plaintiff. In addition, public figures have qualified privilige because they can rebut any claims publically.
Under American law, qualified privilige, based on the idea that public officials can rebut the claim in the media, protects even 'George Bush likes goat porn,' as long as I didn't knowingly make it up, or fabricate it without any regard to whether it was true or not.
I would be interested to see what Korean law has on this. I believe the American system has been constructed on common law, so its possible Korea simply hasnt had enough defamation cases to get into these issues. One would assume that Noh, as a lawyer, would be versed in Korean law. Then again, he could be using a hopeless lawsuit as a tactic of his own. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mack4289
Joined: 06 Dec 2006
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 2:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks for the link. Surprising. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 3:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
My question would be does Roh's suit have a chance?
In the States, defamatory speech against a public official is priviliged so long as its directed towards the public official's fitness for office. For example, if I call George Bush 'corrupt' and 'a bad leader,' this is privilged speech. If I say, "George Bush likes goat porn," then I would be liable for defamation. Even so, the burden of proof would be on the plaintiff. In addition, public figures have qualified privilige because they can rebut any claims publically.
Under American law, qualified privilige, based on the idea that public officials can rebut the claim in the media, protects even 'George Bush likes goat porn,' as long as I didn't knowingly make it up, or fabricate it without any regard to whether it was true or not.
I would be interested to see what Korean law has on this. I believe the American system has been constructed on common law, so its possible Korea simply hasnt had enough defamation cases to get into these issues. One would assume that Noh, as a lawyer, would be versed in Korean law. Then again, he could be using a hopeless lawsuit as a tactic of his own. |
Have you noticed there have been zero law suits against 9-11 conspriacy theorists who say that Bush was behind 9-11.
This is libel but no one has gotten sued for it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 3:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
Have you noticed there have been zero law suits against 9-11 conspriacy theorists who say that Bush was behind 9-11.
This is libel but no one has gotten sued for it. |
It would be a civil action in America, Joo. A tort. The President would only get money. It doesn't make sense for him to press such claims. Moreover, those whackjobs probably belief what they are saying. If that's true, then he cannot collect! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 3:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
Have you noticed there have been zero law suits against 9-11 conspriacy theorists who say that Bush was behind 9-11.
This is libel but no one has gotten sued for it. |
It would be a civil action in America, Joo. A tort. The President would only get money. It doesn't make sense for him to press such claims. Moreover, those whackjobs probably belief what they are saying. If that's true, then he cannot collect! |
If you go to the 9-11 sites these claims are full of disinfomation. I don't think that those behind those sites really believe what they say - they are so full of intentional false hoods . I think the make the theories to create civil disorder in the US.
What they do is political disinformation against their enemy - the US govt. They can never get their way unless there is a major change in the politcal landscape in the US. There web sites are a form of poltical warfare against the US. It is no coincidence that many 9-11 conspiracy web sites are also holocaust deniers.
It is all done for a poltical purpose. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 3:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| Kuros wrote: |
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
Have you noticed there have been zero law suits against 9-11 conspriacy theorists who say that Bush was behind 9-11.
This is libel but no one has gotten sued for it. |
It would be a civil action in America, Joo. A tort. The President would only get money. It doesn't make sense for him to press such claims. Moreover, those whackjobs probably belief what they are saying. If that's true, then he cannot collect! |
If you go to the 9-11 sites these claims are full of disinfomation. I don't think that those behind those sites really believe what they say - they are so full of intentional false hoods . I think the make the theories to create civil disorder in the US. |
In defamation cases, burden of proof is on the plaintiff. Particularly when it comes to public officials. It would be very difficult to prove some of these things.
I'm not defending the 9-11 truthers at all. But again, I think you have a habit of elevating some of your enemies. They're losers. Period. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 4:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| If anyone goes to these sites they will see a meticulous effort to put them togther. Often they are not whackos It is done for an insidious political objective. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mack4289
Joined: 06 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 7:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Wouldn't a lawsuit require Bush to prove that they know he wasn't involved in 9/11 but purposefully mislead people about it? That wouldn't be too easy. Plus it wouldn't seem too presidential for Bush to be dragging Alex Jones or one of these other retards into a courtroom. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
