I recalled the face of a GNP official who contested the constituency in question until the shortlist fell to three. People around him reportedly advised him now the real power has come, it would be better for him to look for another district. But he said no, he had put a lot of work into this constituency, and he was going to stick with it. He, too, was a formidable aide of a presidential candidate five years ago. Now he has been swept away by the new current.

Such instances of party ranks and file being omitted from the party nomination are common these days. Incumbent lawmakers who head party districts, let alone lawmakers elected by proportional representation, succumb to new faces chosen by the new administration.

The main reaction to the GNP’s nomination of parliamentary candidates has been, "Just as expected." People reputed to be pro-Lee have secured nomination certificates without fail. Though far fewer in number, core supporters of ex-chairwoman Park Geun-hye, whose disqualification in the nomination could invite Park's anger, are also surviving. But current lawmakers who only halfheartedly aligned themselves with party factions are omitted even if there are no disqualifying factors. If they are seen as multiple-term lawmakers, or getting on in years, they have to give up -- except when they have ties to Lee.

The nominations are determined by the 11-member nomination screening committee, a majority or six of whom are outsiders. They are said to screen applicants entirely on their own without outside pressure. Yet miraculously, the committee accurately reflects the dynamics of the party.

Of course there is bound to be a surfeit of aspirants when a party is in the ascendant. And the faithful retainers of the new boss are naturally given priority when a new power base is formed. Next are the newcomers with reputable resumes, who will run with the expert tag attached in strategic districts. And to distribute nominations this way, you have to weed out a large number of incumbent lawmakers who are out of favor or who have failed to secure firm ropes.

The party leadership is trying to sell this process as "nomination reform." Likening the replacement of current legislators with new faces to the amputation of their arms and legs, they call it "painful reform." The public, normally annoyed by the scrappy National Assembly, applauds any major replacement.

But is it fair to call the cull of incumbent lawmakers reform? But claiming to have kicked out family members in pursuit of the noble goal is nothing but eyewash. The new lawmakers to be elected in the general election after many pro-Lee or pro-Park legislators are eliminated will all be pro-Lee. And those who sided with the Lee faction but failed to be nominated are bound to be assigned to some of the thousands of public posts over which the new president exercises his personnel prerogative.

Old wine in new bottles, then? Quite a few among the so-called new faces that have secured GNP nominations enjoyed privileges in the previous administration, and intend to continue enjoying favors by attaching themselves to the "Ko So Yeong" gravy train -- for Korea University, Lee's alma mater, Somang Presbyterian Church, of which Lee is an elder, and his home region Yeongnam.

What many want to know is who and on what grounds has been given a license to print nomination certificates. It's hard to find unusual reforming trend when we examine the pre-political careers and political performances of those who lead the nomination, calling for the replacement of as many as 40 percent of incumbent lawmakers. No, their outstanding achievement may be only that they smelled future power in advance and positioned themselves around it.

We may be helpless before the political reality whereby parliamentary candidates are nominated according to their distance from power and the needs of the powerful. But it makes my face burn with shame that this is packaged as reform.