South Korean election body criticized for costly overseas trips amid domestic outsourcing

South Korea's National Election Commission (NEC) has drawn criticism for spending billions of won on dispatching election officials overseas for up to a year, while simultaneously outsourcing a significant portion of its domestic election management to local governments. This practice has led to accusations of "overseas junkets" and a lack of transparency regarding the officials' activities.

“

Domestic election affairs are largely entrusted to local governments, while NEC officials are dispatched to preferred overseas cities for up to a year.

According to data released by People Power Party lawmaker Joo Jin-woo, the NEC dispatched a total of 40 overseas election officials for the 22nd general election and the 21st presidential election. The total cost for these assignments amounted to 3.667 billion won (approximately $2.7 million USD), with 3.144 billion won allocated for the general election and 523 million won for the presidential election.

During the 21st presidential election, which involved 223 overseas polling stations across 118 countries, election officials were only sent to 22 locations in nine countries. These included major cities like New York, Los Angeles, Tokyo, Paris, and Sydney. Meanwhile, 109 countries with 201 polling stations, such as Mongolia, Nepal, and East Timor, did not receive any NEC personnel. Notably, India, home to over 12,000 expatriates, was also excluded from the dispatch list.

“

The question is, what are the criteria for dispatch, and why is a one-year long-term dispatch necessary?

Joo Jin-woo pointed out the disparity in resource allocation, stating that domestic election operations, involving over 14,000 polling stations, were largely handled by local government employees. In contrast, overseas election officials for the general election stayed abroad for a full year, starting in June 2023, with an average cost of 142.91 million won per person. Furthermore, reports detailing the actual work performed by these long-term overseas staff are largely missing. The presidential election saw no weekly reports, and for the general election, only one weekly report from the first week of January 2024 was found among the year's documentation. The lawmaker questioned the criteria for these extended overseas assignments and the significant expenditure of taxpayer money when domestic election management appears to be lacking.

“

While billions of won in taxpayer money are spent on overseas missions with inadequate reporting, domestic election management has holes.