top of page

WE THE PEOPLE

4.10 Korean General elections can be re-run



Election law is a procedural law, which means that if there is a procedural problem, the election is invalid. The Korean election system has a fatal procedural problem. When I was a candidate in the 22nd general election, I pledged to file an election nullification lawsuit as a member of the National Assembly if I won. Every single member of the 22nd National Assembly should do so if they have a conscience. Only then will the validity of the election invalidation lawsuit be strengthened and gain national consensus. Most importantly, it can be won in court.


If the loser sues, it's “I should have won the election...” and if the winner sues, it's “I won, but it's invalid because there was a procedural problem.” The purpose of such a lawsuit is to legally challenge the election. The purpose of these lawsuits is very important to win legally. Both the early voting system and the eletronic ballot machine have problems with electoral law. Because election law is a procedural law, you can win a case by raising procedural issues. That's why the winners have to file an election invalidation lawsuit.


Let's say that the candidates who claimed election tampering won this time. Under the current election law, all elected lawmakers must claim that the election was not legitimate, which lays the foundation for the logic of proving election rigging. The Election Committee and the Supreme Court are on the same side. In this unfavorable situation, it is virtually impossible to win legally if you ignore procedural issues and only talk about evidence of manipulation.


The reason why Korea's election system has become an easy target is because the election law itself was unfairly and opaquely amended before the alleged manipulation and transformed into a bizarre form that makes everyone involved in the election an accomplice to fraud. Evidence of election manipulation must be proven, but procedural problems are a matter of legal logic that need not be proven. The Supreme Court can only make a proper ruling if it consistently applies irrefutable logic by first determining whether the election complies with the Public Offices Election Law and then presenting evidence of both procedural problems and rigging.


For the past four years, I have been advocating for the abolition of the electronic ballot sorter (E-voting machine) and early voting system, which are in serious violation of the Public Offices Election Law and the Constitution. The ballot sorter is equipped with high-performance chips (MCU & FPGA). It is a computerized device that cannot be used in parliamentary elections according to the Public Offices Election Law.


Since they can be manipulated by programs, they can create mixed votes. For example, 3 real votes + 1 fake vote can be distributed to a specific candidate, or the votes of a specific candidate can be invalidated. Therefore, it cannot be used because it violates the counting procedures of the hand-counting method, such as Article 178 (Procedure of counting) and Article 5 (Counting by computerized organization) of the current Public Office Election Law. Nevertheless, the Election Committee has been using the electronic voting machine since 2002, when it was renamed ballot sorter, for 22 years until the 2024 general election.


The pre-election system is also an evil law that shortens five of the 12 days of the general election for candidates. It is a law that violates fair elections. It clearly conflicts with the constitutional principles of homogeneity of sovereigns and representation through uniform representation of the people at the same point in time. In addition, the systemic problems of the early voting system, such as the possibility of fake ballots being inserted during the transportation of out-of-town early voting, the batch printing of stamps that cannot be checked by the early voting supervisors, and the inability to check the early voting list, have become a bribe for suspected election rigging.


The People's Power Party and the Democratic Party of Korea should immediately file a lawsuit to invalidate the election. At the same time, we should look into why the statistically impossible difference between the advance vote and the main vote in the April 10 general election was produced; why more than 1.3 million invalid votes were cast; why the Joguk Reform Party won the overwhelming first place (37.6%) in the overseas Korean proportional representation vote; and why the Democratic Party swept the advance election in all districts even though conservative 60-year-olds voted the most. Dr. Jang Jae-un (Colonel, 34th Army - Reserve), who built the first integrated computer system for the Armed Forces Weapons Command and then formed a computer team and operated it himself, claimed in an interview with Sky Daily.


“We need to supervise the computer operation system that programmed the pre-election, and it only takes a week. We need to select 10 information technology (IT) supervisors. We need to select 30 computer geniuses from all over the country, and then we can supervise the information system with just a notice from the Ministry of the Interior and Safety. You don't need a prosecutor's investigation, you don't need a raid, you can simply solve all the suspicions with the program of the six people in charge, including the chief of the first level of election information, who manages the general and presidential elections in the 'Information Operations Division' of the Information Management Bureau, which has a development team that manages the pre-election program.”






Former Monthly Chosun reporter

Former Weekly Chosun reporter

CEO of Happy Baeksus Inc.

CEO of Bexus Media

Director of Bexus Policy Research Institute

22nd National Assembly Election Yongsan-gu Independent Candidate

11 views0 comments

Comentários


bottom of page