The incident involving Senator Alex Padilla highlights a crisis in American politics.

Incident involving California Senator Alex Padilla

On June 12, 2025, U.S. Senator Alex Padilla from California was forcibly restrained and handcuffed by FBI agents during a press conference at the Department of Homeland Security, which dealt a significant shock to American democracy. This incident is a major issue with political symbolism that is difficult to downplay as a mere security misunderstanding or procedural error. The fact that a sitting congressman was physically subdued while attempting to ask questions about policy in a public setting is seen as a sign of how far the boundaries of the democratic system can retreat, given its rarity.

Republic of Korea Representative Kang Seong-hee Incident

What's even more startling is that a similar incident occurred almost simultaneously in South Korea, which is on the opposite side of the globe. In January 2024, during an official event chaired by President Yoon Suk-yeol in Jeonbuk, lawmaker Kang Sung-hee of the Progress Party attempted to speak out, urging a 'shift in national policy.' She was forcibly removed from the venue by presidential security personnel, her mouth covered and limbs lifted, and this scene was broadcast nationwide. Although the two incidents took place in different countries and distinct political cultures, they both reveal how weak the institutional guarantees for freedom of expression and the right to public critique can actually be.

Political Context of the Padiya Incident in the United States

The Padiya incident in the United States was the result of a complex intertwining of political polarization, control over criticism of power, and conflicts surrounding immigration policy. Congressman Padiya attempted to publicly question the Department of Homeland Security's decision to deploy troops to the southern border, but he was removed under the pretext of 'security measures for maintaining order,' ultimately leading to a situation where he was handcuffed. This serves as a warning for democracy, illustrating the reality that freedom of expression is not effectively guaranteed not only for citizens but also for elected representatives like members of Congress, and it is a vivid example of how power seeks to control the public discourse.

Political Context of the Korean Lawmaker Kang Seong-hee Incident

The case of South Korean lawmaker Kang Seong-hee also has a similar structure. During an event attended by the president, lawmaker Kang attempted to publicly demand a policy shift but was physically prevented from doing so. The presidential security office explained that there was a 'security threat' because she held the president's hand and would not let go. However, this reveals how the freedom of criticism can be placed within institutional loopholes, as it immediately considered a lawmaker raising an issue with the nation's highest authority as a 'threat' and suppressed it.

Essential Crisis of Democracy

These two incidents illustrate the fundamental crises faced by democratic societies in three key aspects. First, the suppression of expression by public authority cannot be dismissed as mere on-site judgment or a security-mandated measure. This raises fundamental questions about the nature of power and the functioning principles of democratic institutions. If even elected officials are silenced when revealing their identities and questioning policies, how can the safety of public discourse, where ordinary citizens can question power and raise issues, be guaranteed? Second, there is a tendency for arbitrary judgments by power institutions like the Secret Service or the FBI to take precedence over constitutional rights. Members of Congress are protected by constitutional privileges and should be regarded as having the right to question, and their statements should be seen as part of public political activities. However, the recurring reality of these individuals being suppressed under the vague interpretation of 'on-site threats' demonstrates how easily institutional safeguards can be weakened by the whims of power. Third, in a political context, these incidents can commonly be interpreted as attempts by power to preemptively suppress critical voices and block channels for public opinion formation. Representative Padilla, who represents Latinx immigrants, is a senator from the Democratic Party, and Representative Kang is a member of a progressive party who has been at the forefront of criticism against the regime. Both incidents occurred during politically sensitive times, namely in the lead-up to elections, lending credibility to the interpretation that power attempted to physically suppress 'critical voices.'

Boundaries of Freedom of Expression and Democracy

Ultimately, the two incidents that took place in the United States and South Korea reveal a common vulnerability that arises when freedom of expression and public power collide in contemporary democracies, beyond the geographical distance and differences in political systems. They leave us with important lessons. Democracy is not merely maintained by the stability of power. Rather, it is a system that can only survive when diverse voices clash in the public sphere, and compromise and adjustment occur in that process. Right now, we are witnessing the public sphere being stifled in the face of physical force, and silence being imposed. To prevent such moments from repeating, it is crucial to overcome the impulse to resolve issues through physical suppression or exclusion and to engage in institutional and cultural reflection that respects criticism, opposition, and even uncomfortable questions.

Efforts for the Restoration of Democracy

Now, democratic countries must acquire the ability to resolve conflicts not by silencing others and restraining them in handcuffs, but through persuasion, listening, and responsible debate. Freedom of expression is not merely part of a list of rights. It is the breath of democracy, and only through the freedom of dissent can that system be completed. The most valuable lesson that the cases of Representatives Padiya and Kang Seong-hee leave us is this: Democracy lives through the language of tolerance and the freedom of dissent. The effort to protect that freedom must continue even at this moment. That is the boundary of democracy that we must uphold.