Six opposition parties, led by the Democratic Party of Korea (DPK), have ignited political controversy by reintroducing a special counsel bill to investigate allegations of “Inducement of Foreign Aggression” along with insurrection. Resubmitted on Dec. 9, the bill broadens its scope to include acts such as operating loudspeakers along the inter-Korean border, disseminating anti-North Korean leaflets, and deploying troops to conflict zones. These actions are labeled as efforts to provoke hostilities against South Korea in conspiracy with a foreign country.
Opposition lawmakers argue the investigation is essential to address suspicions that President Yoon Suk-yeol’s administration deliberately sought to provoke war.
The ruling People Power Party (PPP) strongly opposes the measure, describing it as a politically motivated attack on the government’s national security policies. The debate has shifted from constitutional concerns over the initial insurrection-focused bill to broader disputes surrounding South Korea’s security strategy.
Under Article 92 of South Korea’s Criminal Act, “Inducement of Foreign Aggression” is defined as conspiring with a foreign country to initiate hostilities against South Korea or collaborating with foreigners to fight against the country. Convictions carry penalties of death or life imprisonment.
On Dec. 12, the DPK’s Inducement of Foreign Aggression Fact-Finding Task Force demanded the swift implementation of the special counsel bill, calling for investigations into the Office of the President, the Office of National Security, the National Intelligence Service, and the Drone Operations Command.
DPK Rep. Chung Dong-young likened the situation to the 1997 “Chongpoong Incident,” in which officials were convicted of conspiring with North Korea to stage military provocations for electoral gains. “Unlike the failed political scheme in 1997, Yoon’s actions are aimed at provoking war and staging a coup,” Chung claimed.
Rep. Bu Seung-chan echoed these concerns, citing “evidence of irregularities in drone infiltrations, leaflet campaigns, and pinpoint attacks on balloon launch sites.”
The PPP has denounced the proposed legislation as a “treasonous bill” undermining national security. PPP Chief Spokesperson Shin Dong-wook defended the loudspeaker operations as defensive measures against North Korean provocations, including balloon attacks filled with waste materials. “By the DPK’s logic, should we stand idly by when North Korea provokes us?” Shin asked.
Deputy Floor Leader Park Hyeung-soo warned that the bill seeks to criminalize legitimate military efforts to deter North Korean aggression, effectively tying the hands of the military in critical security operations.
The reintroduced bill, now titled the “Special Counsel Act for Investigating Insurrection and Inducement of Foreign Aggression by the Yoon Suk-yeol Administration,” lists accusations including resuming loudspeaker operations, expanding leaflet campaigns, deploying drones into Pyongyang, targeting balloon launch sites near the Northern Limit Line (NLL), and allegedly provoking conflicts through overseas troop deployments.
The DPK’s push intensified after investigators discovered notes in the possession of Roh Sang-won, a former intelligence commander arrested in connection with a December martial law incident. The notes reportedly referenced “guiding North Korean attacks at the NLL” and “targeting balloon sites.” Some opposition lawmakers have also accused former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun of ordering strikes on North Korean balloon launch sites, though the military denies the allegations.
Yang Uk, a research fellow at the Asan Institute for Policy Studies, cautioned that while any evidence uncovered warrants investigation, using it as a pretext to scrutinize the entirety of South Korea’s North Korea policies “crosses the line.”
Military officials maintain that loudspeaker operations were reactivated as countermeasures to North Korea’s balloon provocations. Notably, the DPK had previously called for stronger responses. In June, Rep. Kim Byung-joo criticized the military for failing to intercept balloons, urging more robust measures.
Allegations of troop deployments to Ukraine have also surfaced but were dismissed by government officials. They clarified that the claims likely refer to intelligence analysis teams, which do not require parliamentary approval, and confirmed no such deployments had occurred.
The National Court Administration has raised concerns over the bill’s provisions allowing unrestricted searches and seizures of military intelligence. A parliamentary review warned that such measures could risk exposing sensitive national security information unrelated to the investigation.
To address these concerns, recommendations have been made to limit the scope of investigations and ensure any unrelated classified materials are immediately returned or destroyed.
