|
It has been revealed that the father of ruling Uri Party chairman Shin Ki-nam searched for Korean conscription evaders as a Japanese military police sergeant during the period of Japanese colonial rule in Korea. It has also been disclosed that in an interview with the Maeil Daily, the mouthpiece of Japan's governor-general's office, he said he explained to his former primary school pupils his motive of joining the Japanese military this way: "The pupils must unconditionally respect and obey their teachers... As a teacher, I thought I must first volunteer for the Japanese Army." Asking Shin to take responsibility for such personal history of his father, however, runs counter to the spirit of the constitution banning the guilt-by-association system.
Apart from this, however, Shin's dual attitude and lying about this issue cannot but be problematic for a politician who is responsible for the governing party. When media raised allegations about his father a month ago, Shin contended, "The media are competing misreporting without confirming basic facts." Blaming them of "spreading falsehood and indulging in defamation," he even disclosed a plan to cope with the media legally. Furthermore, he blamed the press for "scheming to distort the purity of the proposed pro-Japanese truth investment law." About his father, he asserted, "After serving as a teacher, he joined the police following the nation's liberation."
Being no longer able to conceal the facts at media tracking, stubborn Shin finally gave in, saying, "I didn't wish to disclose the facts. I thought they would be naturally revealed in due course if and when I made further political advance." This means that he had concealed the facts, though he had been aware of them all. Shin still said that, "I denied the facts because they alleged my father was a policeman, while he was a military policeman," "My late father's pro-Japanese acts don't disqualify me to assert our national uprightness, do they?" and "My late father can be subjected to an inquiry into pro-Japanese activities." As ordinary men, we can hardly judge if we had to praise his courage in sacrificing his father for the sake of a great cause. Apart from this, had he had such moral courage, he wouldn't have found it necessary to conceal the facts from the outset and disgraced the press with falsehood and distortion.
Uri Party executives defended Shin, saying, "He did not actively lie," and "It was out of a pure intent to block a distortion of the pro-Japanese acts investigation law." These utterances are much more shameful than Shin's lies. What the incumbent administration must really learn from Shin's family history is a too commonplace awakening that during the 35-year period of Japanese colonial rule, the people could not live as morality textbooks dictated.
|
