Exclusive Interview with Lee Mi-hyun, Co-Director of the Citizens’ Action Committee for the October 29 Itaewon Tragedy
[Suwan News = Yoon Byung-ik, Citizen Reporter] On the 18th, we conducted an exclusive interview with Lee Mi-hyun, Co-Director of the Situation Room for the Citizens’ Action Committee on the October 29 Itaewon Tragedy (hereinafter “Co-Director Lee”).
The following is a Q&A with the head of the Joint Operations Center.
Reporter: First, could you please introduce yourself?
Co-Director of
the Joint Situation Room: Yes, hello. My name is Lee Mi-hyun, and I serve as the co-director of the Joint Situation Room for the Citizens’ Action Committee on the October 29 Itaewon Tragedy.
Yoon Byung-ik, Citizen Reporter: Yes, let’s get right into the questions now.
First of all, could you please explain what has happened since the tragedy?
Co-Director of the Joint Situation Room: The tragedy occurred on the evening of October 29 of last year, during the Halloween weekend, and after the process of recovering the victims’ remains, the bereaved families were finally able to gather for the first time around the end of November.
As you know, the government has effectively hindered the victims’ families from meeting and communicating with one another.
They did not even share contact information. Amid this situation, the bereaved families searched for one another and finally met around the end of November to hold a press conference demanding that the government investigate the truth, punish those responsible, and implement measures to prevent a recurrence….Then, starting in December, they formed an organization called the “10.29 Itaewon Tragedy Bereaved Families’ Council” and have been working to uncover the truth ever since. Starting in November, a parliamentary investigation was conducted by the National Assembly. There was also a special parliamentary committee, and the police launched a special task force investigation. These efforts continued until around January, but in reality, very little was uncovered.
The police’s special task force investigation ended up being a “scapegoating” exercise, focusing solely on holding frontline officers accountable. As for the National Assembly’s parliamentary inquiry, it was inevitably limited in what it could uncover due to obstruction by members of the ruling People Power Party, the government’s refusal to submit documents, and instances of perjury.
Therefore, since then, the bereaved families and civic groups have argued, “We must stand up against these attempts to obstruct and hinder the investigation and ensure a proper uncovering of the truth,” and to continue uncovering the truth—such as why rescue efforts failed that day and why crowd control measures were not put in place despite the expectation that a large crowd would gather—they recognized the need to establish a Special Investigation Committee. Consequently, we launched a campaign to enact a special law establishing an independent fact-finding body to set up the Special Investigation Commission. In March, we traveled across the country in a bus we called the “Truth Bus,” asking the public to sign a national petition calling for the enactment of this special law. Finally, on April 20, the bill was submitted to the National Assembly through a joint proposal by 183 lawmakers. However, in June, although we had expected the bill to pass through the Standing Committee on Public Administration and Security—which had jurisdiction over the matter—it was not even properly discussed. Consequently, we, the bereaved families, set up a protest camp in front of the National Assembly and even went on a hunger strike to demand that the National Assembly fulfill its deliberative role. Fortunately, around the end of June, the special bill was designated as an “expedited agenda item,” which helped speed up the deliberation process. We are currently continuing our efforts to ensure that the Committee on Public Administration and Security conducts a thorough review of the bill this July.
Reporter: Regarding how life has changed—from life before the disaster to life after the disaster…
Co-Director
Lee: Since I am not a family member of a victim but a representative of a civic group, I believe there are some limitations to what I can say.
Reporter: Yes, I’m asking this question with that in mind.
Co-Director of
the Joint Situation Room: Actually, even before this tragedy, if we look back on the Sewol ferry incident—this year marked the ninth anniversary of that tragedy. The period around the Sewol Ferry disaster was a time when we truly came to realize just how casually the value of safety is treated in our society. And now, eight years later, another disaster has occurred in which so many people have lost their lives…Personally, as someone involved in civic activism, I’ve been campaigning with the hope that our society could take a step toward becoming a safer place, but realizing that we haven’t been able to do so has left me feeling very frustrated… It hasn’t been easy. And as for Itaewon itself—a place I personally held very dear, having visited the site of the tragedy just a week prior—it was a space where young people of all backgrounds could go to spend time and enjoy themselves. I still can’t believe that people could be walking down the street right in the heart of Seoul and fall victim to a tragedy like this. That’s why I’ve come to believe that civic groups, the government, and the National Assembly all need to be more vigilant and make greater efforts to ensure the safety of our society. When I met with the families, I initially found it incredibly difficult to come to terms with this tragedy myself. However, meeting the families—who, even in the midst of that situation, continue to take the lead in seeking the truth and restoring the victims’ honor—has given me the courage to carry on.
Reporter: And actually, as I was listening to your response, it occurred to me that while the Itaewon tragedy resulted in a large number of young people losing their lives, there are actually more places than one might expect where there is a risk of a similar, catastrophic incident occurring. For example, public facilities like Lotte World—which is located near my home, so not far away—are prime examples of places where young children and teenagers frequently visit for recreation, and where the risk of being crushed or trampled occurs quite often. Whenever such places exist, I’ve always felt that the relevant local governments or the national government should have mandated—and should still mandate—that safety measures be implemented well in advance.
I would like to request an explanation of the specific issues with the response by the government and the Seoul Metropolitan Government immediately following the tragedy.
Lee, Co-Director of the Joint Situation Room: I believe that, starting right after the disaster—from the response process to preparedness—it was, in fact, a total failure. On the night of the disaster, even during the rescue operations, the Prime Minister’s Office and other agencies that should have been in charge of overall coordination failed to establish the necessary disaster management organizations or simply neglected their duties, resulting in a great deal of confusion at the scene. Not only were there such unprepared and irresponsible measures at the scene that day, but even afterward—as I mentioned earlier—the government prevented bereaved families from contacting one another, and immediately following the incident, Minister Lee Sang-min, the Prime Minister, and ruling party lawmakers—have implied that the victims were to blame. They have completely ignored the government’s and police’s responsibility for failing to implement crowd control measures that day, instead insulting the victims who were present at the scene and shifting the blame onto them. Furthermore, the government has yet to offer a single proper apology. Without consulting the bereaved families, the government set up a joint memorial altar here and declared a “national mourning period.” In fact, they even established the memorial altar simply as a place to honor “the deceased,” without a single name or photograph of the victims. They insulted the victims by repeatedly bringing up the drug investigation, as if to suggest the victims had somehow been at fault for their own deaths, and made statements that actually contributed to obscuring the truth.
Minister Lee Sang-min was even subject to impeachment (Editor’s note: impeachment proceedings), but the remarks he made the day after the disaster suggested that even if more police or firefighters had been deployed, the tragedy could not have been prevented. The very reason police and firefighters exist is to protect the safety and lives of the people. To suggest that even if more personnel—who were not adequately prepared—had been deployed, the disaster could not have been prevented is, in fact, an extremely irresponsible attitude; I suspect it was simply a defensive reaction to the prospect of responsibility being placed on them…I suspect that’s what it was—but it’s an extremely irresponsible attitude. Although the Constitutional Court is set to issue a ruling on the impeachment trial soon, if we entrust the lives and safety of our citizens to someone this irresponsible, then even if another disaster occurs in the future, the state will simply wash its hands of it, saying, “I don’t care about the people’s lives,” and it would simply mean that the people must fend for themselves. That is why I believe Minister Lee Sang-min’s impeachment must definitely proceed. While the government displayed this kind of irresponsible attitude, the Seoul Metropolitan Government is also not free from blame. In fact, it wasn’t just Itaewon; on Halloween night, large crowds had gathered not only in Itaewon but also in places like Hongdae and Gangnam, and the overall responsibility for ensuring that such large crowds gathering across the entire city of Seoul were properly and safely managed naturally lies with the Seoul Metropolitan Government. Nevertheless, the Seoul Metropolitan Government failed to fulfill that responsibility, and although the mayor at the time is speaking as if he were free from that responsibility—citing the fact that he was on an overseas business trip—I believe he absolutely cannot be absolved of that responsibility. That is why the memorial altar for the victims of the Itaewon tragedy was originally set up in Buksapyeong, but we moved it here around the 100th day after the tragedy. In fact, Mayor Oh Se-hoon met with the bereaved families at the National Assembly and promised to spare no effort in providing support. Nevertheless, when we requested his support for moving the site to this area near downtown Seoul, Mayor Oh Se-hoon flatly refused; instead, he responded by fencing off the plaza and outright denying permission to set it up there. The process that left us with no choice but to come to this square was marked by Mayor Oh Se-hoon’s deception and disregard. Nevertheless, there are currently four tents occupying this plaza, and the Seoul Metropolitan Government has now requested that we pay 29 million won in compensation for two months’ use. Since it has now been over four or five months since we arrived here, this amount is expected to grow even larger. Yet, while the Seoul Metropolitan Government has failed to fulfill its responsibilities—and has not sincerely made memorial spaces for the victims who lost their lives publicly available— by imposing such excessive and punitive compensation demands regarding the memorial altar, they are intimidating the spirit of remembrance and discouraging bereaved families and citizens who wish to pay their respects—and this can only be interpreted as an attempt to obstruct these efforts. Therefore, regarding this matter, if the Seoul Metropolitan Government truly feels even the slightest sense of sorrow for the victims’ sacrifices and deaths, and has even the slightest desire to comfort the bereaved families and stand with them, I believe this attitude makes no sense at all.
Reporter: So, it seems we can conclude that there is no compassion in the response by a certain Seoul City agency…?
Joint Situation Room Director
Lee: I don’t want to use the term “compassion.” I believe this simply means they lack a sense of responsibility for the duties they are supposed to fulfill.
Reporter: It seems we can view this as a complete lack of responsibility—not even a shred of it—and a total absence of any sense of regret; it’s a case of total irresponsibility and total indifference.
As for the Seoul Metropolitan Government’s attitude, I do believe it’s naturally important to hold them accountable. However, if the Seoul Metropolitan Government does not immediately present concrete measures to prevent a recurrence—and while it seems they are currently failing to do so and will likely continue to do so—if they truly continue to fail to come up with such measures, I believe it is the right thing for anyone to propose measures to prevent a recurrence. In that case, among the various practical measures to prevent a recurrence, which ones do you think are most necessary?
Co-Director of
the Joint Operations Center: As for measures to prevent a recurrence… local governments, the police, the fire department, the medical system, the emergency medical services… all of these would be necessary at the government-wide level.
Since I’m not an expert on each of those specific policies, it’s hard for me to comment in detail, but but I actually believe that, ultimately, to prevent a recurrence, we need to understand what failed to function that night, what went wrong, why the decision was made not to implement crowd control measures, who made that decision, and what systemic factors led to that decision. However, without a thorough investigation into the facts—without knowing exactly which people made which decisions and why—it’s impossible to pinpoint precisely which parts need to be overhauled. Of course, immediately after a tragedy, people will be more vigilant, so accidents might not occur for the next few years. However, if the truth isn’t uncovered and it isn’t clearly revealed which decisions made that day were wrong, I don’t think there’s any guarantee that such decisions won’t be made again once vigilance has waned after one or two changes in administration. So, while it’s important to establish robust systems to prevent recurrence, in reality, the mindset with which those systems are operated is what matters most. Preventing recurrence requires not only systems but also constant decisions by government agencies that prioritize safety and human life—and I don’t believe these things can be changed overnight simply through legislation. Therefore, I believe that to truly prevent recurrence, we must examine everything—including the priorities that guide the decisions made within civil service organizations. To achieve this, I would say that, above all else, a thorough investigation into the facts is of the utmost importance.
Reporter: Yes, so you’re saying that the truth must be uncovered—that we need to find out exactly what happened—and only then can we develop countermeasures based on those findings… But the reality is that many media outlets aren’t paying proper attention to this issue.
This isn’t exactly the phrasing I’d prefer to use, but the fact is that the Korean media—or rather, the majority of media outlets—have failed to fulfill their role. This isn’t something that’s happened just in the last day or two, nor is it a problem that’s only been going on for a year or two. Regarding these media outlets—specifically, what aspects of their reporting stance or approach have been the biggest problems? Do you have any complaints or concerns about media coverage in general? If so, could you please elaborate on those points?
Co-Director of
the Joint Situation Room: Not just with the Itaewon tragedy, but with any disaster or tragedy—or whenever there’s a socially heartbreaking or shocking event—the media tends to focus heavily on facts that can make the issue seem sensational, or or there’s a tendency to take photos in a highly sensational manner by shoving cameras in the faces of victims and their families. So, rather than focusing on the fact that the tragedy occurred or the message it conveys, they often seem to approach the story as if to highlight that single photo or that one sensational headline, rather than the fact that the tragedy occurred or the message it conveys. Instead of conducting in-depth reporting to uncover why the incident happened, or to explore the broader context and underlying implications, media outlets often treat these stories like brief news items and simply move on. As a result, now that eight months have passed since the tragedy, it’s actually difficult to find articles about it. The investigation into the truth behind the Itaewon tragedy hasn’t even properly begun, yet the media has reached a point where they hardly discuss topics like the special legislation anymore. When a major tragedy or incident occurs in our society, one naturally expects the media to take an in-depth approach—delving into the broader context and structural social issues. However, it’s disappointing that it’s becoming increasingly difficult to find media outlets in Korea that actually take that kind of approach.
Reporter: Yes… Actually, the tendency for the media to focus on sensational, superficial, or attention-grabbing aspects of this case rather than its substance isn’t a problem that’s just emerged in the last year or two—it’s actually one of the chronic issues that has plagued the Korean media for quite some time…
Co-Director of
the Joint Operations Center: How many questions are left?
Reporter: There's one left.
In fact, as I heard people point out how the Korean media tends to focus only on things that grab people’s attention, I, too, found myself reflecting on this quite a bit.
In addition to your responses to the questions I asked earlier, please feel free to share any other thoughts you may have—there is no limit on the length of your response.
Co-Director of
the Joint Situation Room: The number of victims has already surpassed 250, and the first anniversary is fast approaching.
Despite this, the bereaved families never imagined that the investigation into the truth would be so sluggish for an entire year since the disaster occurred.
It is deeply regrettable that, even though the Special Act for the Investigation of the Truth is a law designed to protect safety and lives, the National Assembly is dismissing it as if it were merely a bill for political wrangling and is failing to even properly deliberate on it. However, since this is a law that directly addresses our lives and safety, urging the National Assembly to discuss it more seriously and thoroughly is not only the responsibility of the bereaved families but is ultimately impossible without the interest and support of the public. We ask that you, the citizens, continue to show your interest so that the National Assembly will take the lead in enacting this special act to uncover the truth behind the Itaewon tragedy and ensure that those responsible are held accountable. We also ask the media to continue covering the upcoming discussions on amending this special act with close attention. Thank you.
Yoon Byung-ik, Citizen Reporter (This interview was arranged by the citizen reporter himself.)
