Lee pushes back on calls to close Cabinet meetings: 'A good friend speaks frankly'

President Lee Jae Myung on Friday expressed "deep regret" over what he called false claims that opening Cabinet meetings to the public was silencing ministers.

Writing on X, formerly Twitter, Lee pushed back against media reports that some Cabinet ministers had relayed their opposition to live-streaming Cabinet sessions to Prime Minister Han Sung-sook. "I cannot agree with those calling for full closure," he said.

Lee flatly rejected the underlying premise of those reports, saying that based on briefings he had received, "reports that a minister said the open meetings were burdensome or that they had asked for closed sessions do not appear to be true."

He went on to say that matters requiring confidentiality or that could put ministers in a difficult position were already handled in closed sessions. "Openness is the principle governing all administration, including state affairs, and Cabinet meeting minutes have been made public for some time," he said.

Lee added that open sessions also gave ministers a chance to showcase their dedication and competence to the public, noting that many were making good use of that opportunity. He said he had encouraged ministers to call or message him individually if there was something they found difficult to raise even in closed sessions, and that they were free to speak at one-on-one lunches or meetings.

"I am confident that in this administration, there is no minister who cannot say what needs to be said to the president," Lee said. He suggested that the argument that ministers could not speak freely because meetings were open made no logical sense given that closed sessions continued to be held, and that it appeared to reflect the wishes of those who simply wanted to shut down open meetings.

Lee also used an analogy to explain what he believed lay behind the push for closed sessions. "Just as middlemen find direct transactions between producers and consumers inconvenient, there are many who find direct communication between the public and elected officials uncomfortable — I fully understand that," he said. "But I find it hard to agree with blocking direct communication just to protect a middleman's margin."

He went on to say that a good friend was one who spoke frankly. "If a friend thinks you are going down the wrong path but says nothing, that is not friendship — it is self-interest," he said. "A public official who believes a fellow official has a problem that needs correcting but stays silent is either shirking responsibility out of self-interest or betraying the public trust."

He closed by asking, "What do you all think?"