The only televised debate for the Seoul mayoral election ultimately showcased a direct clash between the themes of accountability and stability. However, what lingered in voters' minds after the debate was not the accountability of Oh Se-hoon, the candidate from the People Power Party, but rather the scrutiny surrounding Jung Won-o of the Democratic Party.
The debate, organized by the National Election Commission, took place from 11 p.m. on May 28 to 1 a.m. on May 29, serving as a crucial moment just before early voting.
In an unusual scenario where only one debate was held, the four candidates—Oh Se-hoon, Jung Won-o, Kim Jeong-cheol from the Reform Party, and Kwon Young-guk from the Justice Party—engaged in a heated discussion over pressing issues in Seoul, including real estate, the economy, the omission of rebar in the GTX project, the high-profile demolition disaster in Seosomun, and redevelopment challenges.
In the early part of the debate, Jung Won-o raised the expected theme of the '10-year accountability' regarding Oh Se-hoon. He urged voters to judge Oh for his decade of incompetence, targeting his administrative performance, safety issues, and failures in housing supply. He criticized Oh for not visiting the site of the Seosomun demolition accident, stating, "His absence shows a lack of safety awareness." However, it was later confirmed that Oh had visited the site before Jung on the day of the incident and returned again later that afternoon.
In contrast, Oh Se-hoon defended his record, asserting, "I have done everything possible to normalize Seoul over the past five years," emphasizing themes of stability and experience. He cited initiatives like the Rapid Integration Plan, revitalization of redevelopment and reconstruction, Seoul Run, and the Han River Renaissance, stating, "We are on the brink of becoming the world's third-largest city. I want to complete this overwhelmingly." He also expressed condolences to the victims' families from the safety incidents and promised to establish stricter safety standards and management systems.
However, the debate unexpectedly shifted from Jung's attacks to scrutiny of his own past. The most pointed criticism came from Kim Jeong-cheol, who revisited Jung's past controversy regarding alcohol abuse, directly asking, "Did you ever force anyone to stay out overnight during drinking sessions?"
In response, Jung claimed, "Bringing up unrelated topics only muddles the election." However, interpretations may vary on whether questions about a candidate's past conduct and morality are indeed unrelated to the debate topics. Voter judgment encompasses not only policy capabilities but also the candidate's qualifications, sense of responsibility, and crisis management skills.
Jung's repeated defensive responses to related questions, labeling them as "smear campaigns," "negativity," and "unrelated topics," appeared to weaken his position. At times, he reacted somewhat emotionally. As a challenger expected to lead the attack, spending more time on defense rather than explanation was a missed opportunity.
The controversy over Jung's avoidance of debates clearly weighed on him. On this occasion, Kim Jeong-cheol even brought a panel labeled 'Jung Won-o's Debate Avoidance Calendar,' claiming to have recorded every date Jung had evaded debate proposals.
The Seoul mayoral election is the largest local election in the country, with the choice of 8 million voters at stake. Compared to past elections where multiple TV debates facilitated policy and qualification verification, the fact that this election concluded with only one official debate left voters feeling disappointed.
Oh Se-hoon did not escape criticism either. Kwon Young-guk pressed him hard on the omission of rebar in the GTX project, asking, "Did you really not receive any reports on this?" Jung also targeted Oh over the Seosomun disaster and the shortfall in housing supply.
In response, Oh stated, "I was not informed. I learned about it through the news," emphasizing that he was campaigning while under suspension from his duties. Regarding the housing supply criticism, he countered, "We are in the process of restoring the 389 redevelopment and reconstruction areas that were released during the Park Won-soon administration."
Overall, while Oh faced attacks, he maintained a relatively calm demeanor, emphasizing experience and administrative continuity. In contrast, although Jung Won-o led with the theme of accountability, he found himself on the defensive due to overlapping issues of past controversies, including the alcohol abuse scandal and debate avoidance.
Of course, one debate will not determine the election outcome. Seoul's public sentiment often remains concealed until the last moment. However, it is clear that this debate centered more on the scrutiny surrounding Jung Won-o than on the theme of 'holding Oh Se-hoon accountable.'
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.