President Lee Jaemyung: "Giving Up Direction and Supervision of SCIA Is Grounds for Impeachment"

"It is illogical to claim that excluding the SCIA from open meetings ensures political neutrality"
Directly rebuts AI-use criticism: "I didn’t cite Gemini because I didn’t know"

President Lee Jaemyung said on Oct. 22, in response to controversy over whether the head of the Serious Crimes Investigation Agency (SCIA) should attend State Council meetings, “Giving up the authority to direct and supervise the SCIA would violate the Constitution and the Government Organization Act and be grounds for impeachment,” adding that it would be “a crime punishable under criminal law as dereliction of duty.” He again rebutted arguments against the agency’s attendance at State Council meetings on the grounds of investigative agencies’ political neutrality, emphasizing that the president’s authority to supervise the administration is a constitutional duty, not a choice.

President Lee Jae-myung delivers remarks at the Autumn Sports Festival held at Wanggung Elementary School in Iksan, North Jeolla Province, on Oct. 22, 2026. Yonhap News.

In a post on X (formerly Twitter) that day, Lee wrote, “The Constitution and the Government Organization Act stipulate that all ministries and agencies, whether the Public Prosecution Office, the Korea Meteorological Administration or the National Fire Agency, are subject to the direction and supervision of the president and prime minister,” adding, “The president’s direction and supervision of state affairs is both a power and a responsibility.”

He went on to ask, “Are you saying the SCIA should not be directed and supervised, in violation of the Constitution and laws?” and “Are you saying that direction and supervision should not take place at open meetings, but behind closed doors?”

He criticized the argument, saying, “It is illogical to claim that excluding the agency from open meetings is a way to ensure political neutrality,” and “The insistence that the SCIA should not attend open State Council meetings is an absurd argument that runs counter to the Constitution, the law and common sense.”

He also directly rebutted criticism that he had responded to the controversy by citing an answer from Gemini, a generative artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot. “I didn’t cite Gemini because I didn’t know the answer. I did so to show just how elementary the reasoning was, how much it contradicted the facts and how low its quality was,” Lee explained.

On Oct. 21, Lee had also shared Gemini’s response and described as “an unconstitutional and absurd argument” the claim that the heads of the Public Prosecution Office and the SCIA should not attend State Council meetings. At the time, Lee said, “Correcting the mistaken perception and practice of treating agencies with investigative authority as special cases is also part of normalizing what is abnormal,” adding, “There is no need to worry, as I will not direct investigations into specific cases.”

The controversy erupted on Oct. 20, when Kim Jiyong, the SCIA’s inaugural chief, attended a State Council meeting chaired by the president for the first time since taking office. Kim was filmed taking notes as Lee spoke, prompting criticism that his attendance could undermine the independence and political neutrality of investigative agencies. Opposition parties, including the People Power Party, argued that the agency chief’s regular face-to-face meetings with the president could themselves serve as an unspoken form of pressure on investigations.

The presidential office also rebutted criticism of the president’s alleged reliance on AI and the attendance of investigative agency chiefs at a briefing that morning. Senior Secretary for Public Relations and Communications Seong Gihong asked whether political independence could be said to have been ensured even when the prosecutor general did not attend State Council meetings. He explained that it was inappropriate to equate attendance at State Council meetings with political control over investigative agencies or interference in investigations into individual cases.

Article 11 of the Government Organization Act stipulates that the president, as head of the government, directs and supervises the heads of all central administrative agencies in accordance with laws and regulations. Article 8 of the State Council Regulations, however, provides that the head of a central administrative agency may attend a meeting when the chair deems it necessary. Accordingly, some interpretations hold that the president’s authority to supervise the administration and whether investigative agency chiefs are required to attend State Council meetings are separate legal issues.

With Lee directly rebutting the criticism for a second consecutive day, the debate over investigative agency chiefs’ attendance at State Council meetings is developing into a broader conflict between the president’s authority to supervise the administration and the political neutrality of investigative agencies.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.