Is there no need to worry about the controversy surrounding Oh Kwang-soo and the selection of the second secretary at the presidential office?

The core of personnel appointments - 'balance' and 'intention' are apparent.

The most notable keywords in this appointment are political balance and clarity of message. Woo Sang-ho, a former four-term lawmaker, has been appointed as the Chief of Political Affairs. He is evaluated as a suitable person who has rich experience in cooperation between the ruling and opposition parties and can convey the president's governance philosophy in political terms. Lee Kyu-yeon, former president of JTBC, has been selected as the Chief of Public Relations and Communication, who is a former investigative reporter. He is a respected figure throughout the media and civil society, and there are high expectations that he will be able to convey the government's sincerity and national policy messages to the public in a refined manner. Oh Kwang-soo, a former prosecutor, has been appointed as the Chief of Civil Affairs. He is a peer of the president from the Judicial Research and Training Institute and has a history of participating in reform discussions within the prosecutor's office. The public's reaction to Chief Oh Kwang-soo is decidedly mixed. The overlapping keywords of 'former prosecutor', 'connection with the president', and 'prosecutorial reform' have led many to recall the past emergence of former Prime Minister Yoon Seok-yeol.

"Again Yoon Seok-yeol?" - The concerns of the public are very valid.

The feelings of concern among the public are by no means baseless emotional reactions. There have been too many instances in the world of politics where trust turns into betrayal. In the early days of the Moon Jae-in administration, then-Prime Minister Yoon Seok-yeol was designated as a symbol of judicial reform, and many had high hopes for him. However, the outcome was the opposite. Expectations turned into conflicts, and these conflicts ultimately led to a weakening of the government's power. Even now, many citizens are sending a message to President Lee Jae-myung not to repeat the same mistakes. This is because they appear to share the same conditions, origins, and contexts. However, this time the structure is different.

Decisive Difference - Yoon Seok-yeol is 'Independent Position', Oh Kwang-su is 'Advisory Position'

Former Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-yeol was a prosecutor general guaranteed independence under the constitution. His term of two years was legally secured, and he could not be dismissed at the president's whim. The reason the Moon Jae-in administration ultimately could not dismiss him despite conflicts with him lies here. In contrast, Chief of Civil Affairs Oh Kwang-soo is an advisor under the Presidential Office. As a thorough aide to the president, there is no term guarantee, and he can be replaced at any time. Unless the president's trust is guaranteed, he can be removed from his position even in just one day. President Lee Jae-myung would not be unaware of the Yoon Seok-yeol case. Therefore, the appointment of Chief Oh can be interpreted not merely as an appointment based on personal trust but as a decision that considers the possibility of structural control.

Prosecutorial reform is not about personnel, but about systems - Signals from the government

With this appointment, the presidential office has clearly stated the following position: 'Chief Oh Kwang-soo fully understands the president's philosophy that judicial reform should be done through legislation.' This statement is significant. It is a declaration that, unlike in the past where 'changing people changes the organization,' the direction will be established through legislative and institutional reform. The role expected of Chief Oh is not the power-based role of intervening in prosecution investigations or appointments like previous Civil Affairs Secretaries, but rather a practical advisor responsible for institutional design and legal review. Ultimately, it is recognized within the government that judicial reform cannot be achieved solely through political decisions, and that it must be realized through legislation, even if it takes time.

Concluding – Do not stop monitoring, but also avoid hasty conclusions.

The vigilance of the people is the healthiest instinct of democracy. Power becomes most transparent when it is scrutinized, and it becomes most cautious when it is criticized. However, sometimes 'hasty conclusions' can be just as dangerous as 'criticism.' The appointment of Oh Kwang-soo as chief this time shows clear differences structurally, contextually, and in terms of controllability compared to past cases involving Yoon Seok-yeol. While it is important to remember the risks of personnel within power, it is equally necessary to assess whether there are mechanisms in place to control those risks. The citizen's gaze is sharp, the media is sensitive, and power can no longer operate as it did in the past. Therefore, what is needed now is an attitude of not ceasing oversight but believing to the extent that we can trust. We should avoid making hasty judgments based on the first step taken.

One-line summary

The appointment of Oh Kwang-soo as the Chief of Staff is different from the past with Yoon Seok-yeol. This is a position in the presidential office that can be replaced at any time, and the approach to prosecutorial reform is centered on systems rather than personnel. While concerns are understandable, this time, it is necessary to carefully observe the situation.