We share our content of last debate on April 28th on 5‧18 International Research Institute Agenda Forum: Opinions

Thank you for your participation

□ Forum Overview

Event name: 5‧18 Agenda Forum: Gwangju Regional Opinion Collection Hearing

Topic : 5‧18 International Institute, what will it contain?

Date and Time: 14:00, April 28, 2023, 14:00

Location: Boardroom, 4th floor, 245, Jeonil Building

□ Presentation <5‧18 International Research Center, What will it contain?

❍ Speaker : Seungyong Oh (CEO, Kingpin Policy Research, Ph.D. in Political Science)

* For more information, please refer to the presentation deck

Designated Discussion

"The future role of researchers is to structure and systematize existing research, and the need to build consensus with the 2030 generation"

Park Kyeongseop (Director, Gwangju Institute for Regional Public Policy Platform, PhD in Anthropology)

- Need to reconsider the rationale for including 'freedom' in the name, weighing the pros and cons. The establishment of a research institute and its relationship with a foundation can be referenced to the case of the National Museum of Japanese Forced Labor History. If so, the foundation should be legally recognized as a public benefit corporation.

- In order for the institute to become an international level and the kind of institute that researchers want it to be, it is essential for it to be in sympathy with the local community. We need to actively consider ways to engage with researchers and the 2030 generation.

- Proposed an international academic forum on defining the transition period in the future. Currently, the Gwangju Democracy Forum organized by the Foundation is mainly for activist groups, but it is proposed to organize an academic forum centered on research institutes in Asia and beyond, and to network researchers.

- The work on translating the basic research materials into English should be continued and is expected to be effective in the future.

It is essential to establish a stable legal support system for researchers' operations"

Park Kang-bae (Gwangju Cultural Foundation)

- The ideal way to strengthen the status of the 5‧18 Memorial Foundation considering the government's laws as a whole is to create an independent law that integrates the 5‧18 Memorial Foundation and the Institute.

- If we look at the examples of the Democratic Movement Memorial Association and the War Memorial Hall, which have independent laws, we can operate the foundation and its affiliated organizations based on a stable budget for building and operating buildings, inheritance, and memorial projects within the independent law.

- Keeping in mind the best and worst ways of establishing and operating the institute, we propose that the foundation and the institute become a performing organization of the Gwangju Metropolitan City, with the Gwangju Metropolitan City contributing 10 billion KRW per year in operating costs and shared property. 

"We need to develop research that can represent 5‧18 in the world“

Ms. Lim Soo-Jeong (Representative of Gwangju Women's Call)

- Just as there have been several opportunities for the 5‧18 truth, but the truth has not been fully revealed, there have been local, university, and foundation research centers for 5‧18 research, but there does not seem to be a synthesis of research and results that can represent 5‧18 research. Therefore, the long-named presidential pledge 'International Institute for Freedom, Democracy, and Human Rights' should be the synthesis of 5‧18 research, and it seems wrong to establish it as a subsidiary of the foundation.

- We believe that more discussion is needed on whether the foundation will be able to solve many of the foreseeable problems in the future, given that it has already started as an arm of the foundation.

□ Public Discussion

"Propose to utilize the site of the 5‧18 Education Center upon building a research institute in the future"

"As the 5‧18 Uprising was a nationwide event, it should be fully funded"

"We need to think about how to make it relevant to the younger generation living in the present"

"How to become a research center worthy of international status should be included in the master plan service."

"There is no reason to exclude 'freedom', and it is more important to aim for international-level research that is in line with values and ideology."

"We should always think about the process and outcome of the budget spent on researchers."

"The direction of 5‧18 transmission through researchers should be developed sustainably."

"To create an environment where local 5‧18 research organizations can continue to interact with each other instead of being isolated."

"We need to think about how to become independent without combining with the foundation"

"We need to establish a process to introduce 5‧18 to Koreans and foreigners living and working in Gwangju.“

Park Kyeong-seop : Some of you probably know Gwangju, and some of you are not familiar with it, but the reason why I'm here and talking about it now is that Gwangju was basically established as a private think tank, and now we are doing various policy research activities and various solidarity activities in Gwangju, and one of them is talking about 5‧18 with the 2030 generation, so we published a book called "Post 5‧18", and every year we are holding the May Generation Communication Forum. Tussarbocce Park Yong-joon is also in Gwangju now, and various organizations are producing and disseminating it together, so I think that's probably why you called me here. Now, I've been writing down the discussion, but I'm always confused about this. I'm a researcher and now that I'm working outside, I'm thinking, "Where should I focus my talk," and then I'm going to pull me out as a non-researcher to talk anyway, but I think I'll probably end up talking a little bit as a researcher, so I'm going to talk about three things. One is naming and direction, and I think the speaker before me pretty much covered everything that can be said in a really comprehensive way. I think if you listened to the presentation, you would have agreed with me, and you would have thought, "Oh, you did a good job of finding a speaker," and you mentioned it, but I think it's not just a naming issue. If you think about it, this is actually a value or direction that should be included in a researcher, or a goal that should be pursued, so. But now that I've been doing some 5‧18 research, I'm realizing that I've been missing a little bit of freedom, but there's a good reason for that.

But this is being run by the Foundation for the Support of Victims of Japanese Forced Mobilization. Of course, the foundation is not obviously an entity, but this foundation was established under the Support Act anyway, and it is a public interest corporation. But if this is something that we have to talk about again and again, is the relationship between the foundation and this research institute affiliated or independent or what other form should we consider? But for that, there are actually some aspects that the foundation would have to change a little bit, and if you look at it a little bit legally, it may be difficult to operate as a publicly funded organization unless it becomes a public benefit corporation anyway. Lastly, I'd like to talk about something else. I think I'm going to have to listen to other people's comments more than I'm going to talk at length, so it's kind of in principle anyway, but I think that if we really want to be the kind of researchers that we want to be, researchers at the international level, researchers that can do better what 5‧18 hasn't been able to do, we're going to need to be able to relate to the community, and that's one of the things that I think we need to focus on, and I think one of the things that you mentioned earlier is that there's a difference in the way that different generations talk about 5‧18. I think the 2030s are the ones that need to be emphasized a little bit more, and I'd like to see a little bit more thinking about how they can combine with the researchers now, or how they can combine and grow into researchers later with an interest in 5‧18 research. Also, the contents and functions of the third researcher are just things that I've been thinking about based on your presentation, and these are just some ideas in terms of what can be done within the budget of 1.3 billion korean won right now and looking ahead to the future direction, so these are just my personal ideas right now. Anyway, I think the first thing that we need to look at is the international conference, but you also highlighted the transitional justice model, and we've been talking about it, and we've been combining it, and that's what I'm talking about, is the globalization of the 5‧18, and the important point is the transitional justice issue, and it's been talked about in fragments, and we need to have an international academic forum to sort of put this together.

The second thing is that I was kind of impressed by one of the things that you mentioned, which is that the combination of research and activities, the combination of solidarity activities, is actually almost unique. But most national researchers don't actually combine activities, so it's a little bit idealistic in a way, but I think that's probably why the speaker emphasized policy research, because that's one of the ways that research actually translates into practice, so policy is probably one of the ways that research translates into practice, and education is probably one of the ways that research translates into practice, and that's probably why she talked about that. So I think that what we've been doing and what the foundation has been doing is, if you look at the Gwangju Democracy Forum now, most of the activist organizations are participating, but it would be meaningful to have relevant research institutions in Asia participate in the next year or so. I think it would be good to build a network of researchers and consider such a method. Policy research is also a fact that we continue to hold the World Human Rights City Forum in Gwangju, but various evaluations are needed for this, but again, a little bit of activity or policy aspects or this aspect is weakened, and a little bit of event tendencies are a little stronger, and this is not well connected with research, so these academic events, although it is said that it is the World Human Rights City Forum, so isn't there some aspects that researchers can lead this part? If you're a little greedy, you can run the World Human Rights Cities Forum at the International Institute for Research, which is my personal opinion. The archive issue is that if the vast amount of material produced by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission is transferred to the National Archives, researchers and many people are worried that it is not very accessible, so it is likely to be locked up in a black box if it is transferred to such a system, but as you said earlier, how to unlock it in a smart way? So, I'm a little excited about translating the May Uprising into English, and I think there are some things that need to be done, data that overseas researchers can actually search in English and see the data, because there are existing research works, but they can't see the data, so I think it would be a little meaningful if we continue to work on the basic materials. That's all.

So these people came here in a straight line during the Park Chung-hee government, so it's good to do it that way, but whether we can make an independent law on 5‧18, yes. Then, in relation to Busan, which we are always compared to, the Busan Democratic Protest Memorial Association, which is a corporation in the second column, is a corporation. Then, the Democratic Park in Busan is operated in trust. Democratic Park was created by paying money 5 to 5 with the government and Busan City, and then Busan City is operating like this, giving operating expenses by raising the trust for the Democratic Uprising Memorial Project. Then, the Democratic Uprising Memorial Project is a separate Busan city ordinance. Then, the office of the Democratic Movement Buma Democratic Uprising Memorial Foundation, which was created last year, is Changwon or Masan, and Busan, but this foundation is a model in the order in which the committee appeared in connection with the National Commission on the Past of National Violence, the truth investigation was completed, and the foundation corporation was created. So if you look at the budget for 2000, out of 2.4 billion, 2.2 billion is government funding and the rest is a few hundred million, but it's entirely government funding because the law says to fund the budget, but it's the relationship between the Memorial Foundation and the Memorial Foundation Committee for business, which started first and is actively working, is now the remaining issue, and I'm sure you know better, because you're a board member there, and then there's a little bit to learn from the 4.3 Peace Foundation, which is the 4th. That's why in the '23 budget

the national budget is 5.3 billion korean won, and then the local budget is 4.1 billion korean won, and out of the 4.1 billion won, Jeju Island pays for the operation of the foundation, including labor costs. The reason is that the foundation corporation was created in 2008, and the Peace Park was entrusted to it in 2008, but it is a corporation under the Ministry of the Interior and Safety, but the Ministry of the Interior and Safety kept saying that it could not give the operating expenses just like that in the 4.3 Special Act, so Jeju Island officially designated it as a Jeju Island performing organization in 2013, and Jeju Island started performing. So I asked the people at the 4.3 Peace Foundation, do you have any intention of making the 4.3 Peace Park national, and they said they've never thought about it. Why not? So you're saying that even if we don't call it national, because we're a monopoly industry, we don't have to call it national, so there's no problem with recognition or naming it Korea or whatever. But what's the story, the War Memorial Association owns the War Memorial Hall, and the War Memorial Hall is not a national facility.

Then we can now create a memorial under the Memorial Business Corporation Act that we saw earlier. And then you can do memorial projects. So we're trying to treat it as a national facility for these people as shown in the comparison on the right, and then on the next page, you can do memorial projects under the Honor Restoration, Democracy Movement Honor Restoration and Compensation Act. And then there's the Democracy Cemetery in Icheon, Gyeonggi-do, which the Memorial Association took over 15 years ago and is operating on that basis. So what we can learn a little bit here is that the Democracy Movement Memorial Association has a new facility under this law, and it's a slightly expanded organization under the Memorial Association, so the park in Icheon is either a national facility or it's public or it's military or it's not. Then, under the Special Act on Forced Mobilization, I created a foundation and made a history museum in Busan and followed that pattern, but the exhibition technique or history museum is very nice, but the foundation corporation is not that big or not. I think it's only about 25 people. Then, under the Jeju 4.3 Incident Special Act, I said that I designated to create a memorial foundation and create a park and go to a performing organization, and under the Nogeun-ri Special Act, I created a memorial hall and created the Nogeun-ri Peace Foundation, which is a foundation, but it is actually a corporation. In accordance with the Geochang Incident Act, a memorial park was built in Geochang and Sancheong, so this is Geochang-gun and Sancheong-gun, and a business office was created, and direct officials are just operating like this. If you look at the next page, these are the provisions of the law that apply when creating various organizations, as you know.

Oh Seungyong: I'll read that.

Park kang bae: Yes, I will do that, thank you.

(Everyone laughs)

Park Koo yong: Wrap it up.

Park Kang-bae: So, I think the best way to avoid the worst and the best is to register the 5‧18 Memorial Foundation Plus Research Institute as a non-profit corporation of the central government, whether it is the Ministry of the Interior or wherever it is, and become a performing organization of Gwangju Metropolitan City, and Gwangju Metropolitan City should contribute about 10 billion won a year in operating expenses, including labor costs, and shared property to the research institute and foundation. I think that is the fastest and wisest way. That's all.

Park Ku-Yong : Thank you very much. Please give me a round of applause. Are you usually a fast talker? Are you fast talking today? I have a lot of things to say because I prepared a lot of things, and I'm fast talking, but I've never seen someone who is faster than me. You've given us a lot of material today, the worst of the worst, the best of the best. I think it's quite a lot to discuss. I think we can have a lot of different discussions. Last, but not least, I'm going to turn it over to Lim Soo-jeong from Gwangju Women's call.

Park Koo-yong : I would like to thank you very much for speaking with a sensibility that everyone can think about from the perspective of civil society and citizens. I should have sponsored it for a long time, but I'm not doing it now, but I think I should do it again. Yes, the last one from our city councilor.

Ahn Pyung-hwan: Yes, I would like to say that, since I am in the city council, I would like to listen to what you said today and say that if there is a role that I can play in the council, I will do it well. Originally, I am currently a standing committee of the Industry and Construction Committee, so I was out of interest because I came to focus on Gwangju's economy and people's livelihoods, but I suddenly decided to study today's discussion, so I have to briefly tell you the thoughts I have so far. Anyway, in terms of international research, it is quite meaningful in terms of creating a vessel that can do mid- to long-term research, not short-term research on 5‧18, so it is necessary, and now it is quite meaningful in terms of integrated management of data. The second thing is, I don't know how much 5‧18-related data has been collected now, but I don't know how much data owned by missionaries in Japan, the United States, and Europe, including Germany, has been collected, and I don't know how much of it has been collected, and how much of it has been analyzed now, and how much of it is being shared, and I would like to see this as an international researcher, and this is very important, because when I was doing the YMCA 100th anniversary event, I asked the children of the missionaries who built the Gwangju YMCA a hundred years ago and the materials they own, but I couldn't collect them all. Then, if it becomes a research, I'm a domestic researcher plus international researcher, but I'm thinking that I want a little bit of 5‧18 and job research, so I think it's a little bit of value and everything, but it's necessary to connect to the issue of living and livelihood, so I'm thinking that 5‧18 parties need to create an experience group, and citizens need to create a storyteller job. Then, now I'm asking for five things, I call them 5‧18 five things, one is living, living 5‧18, living and culturalizing 5‧18, how do you do this? The second is localization, what the fountain community has done in this 5‧18 square, how do you localize this in the alleys and villages, how can this spirit and value be localized in the villages and alleys? The third is nationalization. You know about nationalization. Globalization, which we're talking about today, globalization, and now, recently, with 2030, which is an issue, presentization. I want to emphasize this misconception because there's nothing more to say about it. It's written on a blank slate and only the learned can see it. That's it.

Park Koo-yong : Thank you, it's 3:45 p.m. and we can't discuss everything, and I would like to divide the discussion into three main parts. The first one is about the name, which is about freedom, and I don't think it's good to talk about it in the form of a rebuttal, if possible, and I think it's better to talk about your own opinion rather than a rebuttal, and especially at the strategic level, you don't need to talk about it, because the experts come and do it. I don't think you need to say that, and the strategy will be made by the person who is closest to you. First of all, I would like you to talk about ideologically, whether or not it is worthwhile to have freedom or something like that as an important ideology for an international research institute, and not to rebut other people, but to tell your own story. Secondly, the legal status of researchers. I think the people who have discussed it are pretty much in agreement with Seung-Yong Oh. I think you agree with Oh Seung-Yong, but a little bit, because we may not know, so let's talk about those who know. So let's talk about the legal status. Finally, the core business, the core business is mainly research and activities, and the activities are education and researcher networks, forums, and things like that. Well, research is the 5‧18 Research Center, or the 5‧18 Research Center in Gwangju, or the Chosun University Research Center, Chosun University Research Center, what is the exact name? (Democratic Peace Research Institute) I'm sorry. It's the Institute for Democracy and Peace. I'm a professor at Chonnam National University, so I didn't know the exact name, but it's the Institute for Democracy and Peace. After the Institute for Democracy and Peace, Anglican University also has a related institute now. As far as I know, Anglican University recently established an institute by adding 5‧18, the 5‧18 Institute, so I know that, and it was the first to add the name 5‧18 in other regions. There are many ideological, democratic, human rights and peace related to it. I think it should be said that there are related institutes almost all over the country, but in terms of research, I think it's generally like that. I think you're saying that you should do policy research, build data, build archives, and collect them here. It's different from what a university research institute should do. I think you've done these activities, so let's not have a discussion with each individual, but first of all, Seung-yong Oh, please answer briefly about the three things, and then we'll come back and share our opinions on one or three topics. First, Seung-yong Oh?

So that’s why the organization is important, and depending on what kind of organization you have to carry the business, this can function as a convenient means of moving it, but if you can't guarantee it, you can eventually fall into self-contradiction and collapse, so you need to think about the form of the organization, so I heard the case of the Sejong Institute, although it didn't come up in the existing discussion, but now it's not necessarily that way, but it's necessary to think about some kind of new, newly integrated form of such a form, and it's necessary to change the idea. So the researcher just laid the foundation, so it's good, this is it, let's change the board, let's go that way, and the second is the practical issue. The second way to change the game is to try to integrate organizations or integrate functions, which I deliberately left out of my presentation because I thought it would be controversial, so for example, if a researcher wants to be sustainable in the long run, they have to do policy research, and the other thing is archiving, and archiving can be a very important challenge. I was talking about curation earlier, and that inevitably leads to the issue of integration of functions with the 5‧18 archives, which is not to see this as some kind of zero-sum game between each other, but the archives is also facing barriers right now in terms of moving in like this on the grounds of the integrated hospital, and I think one of the ways that we can solve this is if we approach it from some kind of integrated perspective with the researchers, because then the researchers can have their own space and facilities, and it really raises the stakes. And then there's also the ability to create a new business area that can absorb some of the exhibition functions that the archives had that were unique to the 5‧18 and preserve them, but also allow for more integrated management and curation of the records, which is something that I didn't intentionally put in the second part of my presentation. The third one is the realistic problem of creating an organization, you can just build it from scratch, but it's very risky, and I'm sure Kyungnam Yoo is going through a lot right now, but the fact is, if you try to create a global institute, an international institute, you're going to die, you're not going to sleep, you're not going to be able to sleep. So, first of all, he's doing his best within the scope of what he can do, but when outsiders, people like me, who are talking a lot now, look at it, it's going to be like that, isn't it? One of the ways to solve it is that we can do M&A, or we can build it around an existing organization and use it as a model, but now if we name it specifically, it will be controversial. (Laughter) There are ways to do that. Three dimensions. So that's it.

Park koo yong: Thank you very much. I think we're probably talking about the legal status of researchers the most closely today, so let's discuss that first. So, you just mentioned three forms of legal status of researchers, and in general, the National Research Foundation itself, which I know because I've been the head of such an important research foundation, but it's a little difficult to do it now, and it may be a mystery, so the second option is actually what's being done now, and the third option, which is to dismantle it gradually and make it into a research institute, has also been discussed, and I would appreciate it if anyone on the floor has an opinion on that. Would you like to speak first, Executive Director, because you know the situation best?

Cho Jin-tae (Executive Director, 5‧18 Memorial Foundation): I think everything will be organized if I say it, because the research service is starting to proceed now, and we have drawn a design. It will be completed by October 2, which was explained by Mr. Yoo Kyung-nam earlier, and in the process, we are now expecting that many of the opinions expressed today, and sometimes issues, will be dealt with, so even if it is not the right answer in general, we will present one or two proposals. And the issue of converting the 5‧18 Memorial Foundation into a research institute, which was presented by Dr. Oh Seung-yong, started from the Ilhae Foundation. Sejong Institute. I looked at the website at first glance, but if it becomes a research institute, the nature of the 5‧18 Memorial Foundation is completely different from the 5‧18 Memorial Foundation. So, I think you are saying, "Shouldn't this research institute go directly to the Sejong Institute, or isn't it a model like that?" But as I look at it, this status and nature are completely different. I think there is something worth considering as an example. I mean, as a researcher, you're trying to translate the 30 years of work of the 5‧18 Memorial Foundation, and you're trying to do the educational work that many other foundations are doing, the educational materials, and then you're trying to do various events, and you're trying to do all of that, and that's not the way a researcher should be. So I think it's a situation that needs to be reviewed comprehensively on a different level, so if we do it wrong, it could become a fluffy story, and I think that's what we need to do, and then one last thing, I'm looking forward to the role that Representative Ahn Pyeong-hwan plays at the parliamentary level. The 5‧18 Memorial Foundation is not supported by the city of Gwangju, to put it very bluntly. And the 5‧18 Memorial Cultural Center, we are now a tenant. We're paying more than 10 million won a year in rent, so it's not easy, it's not easy, and I know that some of the members of the city council are trying to do something about the 5‧18 Memorial Project right now. There's actually a lot of duplication of work, most notably in the archivist's office. Aside from the records that the Truth and Reconciliation Commission has right now, the 5‧18 Memorial Foundation actually has the most records related to 5‧18. So, considering such things, there are many issues to be solved at the city level. Whether to eliminate the 5‧18 Memorial Foundation altogether, close it down, or create another organizational base, I think there is a way to do this. Anyway, in the middle of the design of this international research institute, there will be an agenda forum, interim report, etc.

Citizen 1: Yeah, I've been listening to the presentation and the discussion, and I'm one of the 5‧18 stakeholders. I wasn't going to say anything, but after listening to the Executive Director, one idea, maybe it's an idea, maybe it's not, but it came to my mind, and I thought it's something we can think about together. I worked in the 5‧18 Seonyang Division of the Gwangju City Government for 4 years until last year, and one of the things I felt while watching various 5‧18 tasks is the problem of the 5‧18 Education Center. I wonder if there is a way to solve the 5‧18 Education Center problem, the education center problem, by combining it with our international institute. Another thing is that if our 5‧18 International Institute needs to build a building in the future, there is a very large vacant lot right next to the current 5‧18 Education Center, right next to the education center, right next to the education center, but no one cares about this at all. I swear, there is a city lot where you can build a building big enough. I don't think it's even our property, and I haven't really looked into what the current ownership is or what the administrative ownership is, but I'm just saying this because I have a vague idea that maybe there's a way that the 5‧18 Education Center and the 5‧18 International Institute could work something out in that vein in the future.

Park koo yong: Okay, thank you. Bureaucrats talk like bureaucrats. (Laughs) It's kind of calming. Anyone else wants to comment? Young people, please comment. Do you have a microphone next to you, the one in yellow, do you have anything to say, the one in the front with the black mask, are you not speaking? I looked for young friends, and if we put it among ourselves, I don't know, but if there is a professor, it seems that they can't talk. They asked me to leave out the moderator, so I was left out. I think it's important that they should talk separately, so they can talk separately, so they can moderate and create an opportunity for them to talk. Because we have a habit of making a board like this and saying, "Come and say a word," and then not doing it. Separately, our executive director, there were a lot of things that I want to say in my 20s and 30s, and it was published in Hankyoreh newspaper last time, because young people said that we adults are gaslighting them with 5‧18, and we even talked about this, so I think it's important to talk about them from their point of view, and create an opportunity for them to get together and talk about this issue. And I would really like to see the society start to look at them as well and have that discussion and have that opportunity. Does anyone else want to add anything? Yes.

Citizen 3: I very much agree with the part that our Mr. Oh Seung-yong presented, and now I would like to make this order to those who are in charge, at least the International Research Institute, you pointed out the balance or the relationship with the foundation very well, but those who are in charge are now leaving the foundation or something like this, and I just saw various archive problems, overlaps, and things like this. I also feel that I am now meeting various people and showing and doing things like this. I've been thinking about that, and I've been thinking about that, too, and I've been talking about the fieldability issue, the currentization issue, and things like that, but it's really hard to do that in the front of any strategy to try to bring our younger generations closer, why. Because now it becomes a state-managed organization, it becomes a related organization. And Gwangju is left alone again. So in this regard, I hope that the people who are currently contracting the International Research Institute will really do something of that nature or something like that in depth. I also did a research on this development plan last year, oddly enough, at the Korea Institute for Democracy and Peace Studies at Chosun University, but in any case, I hope that you will have your own ideas and take some interest in how to solve the problem that Oh Seung-yong raised earlier. It's very important that you don't take it as a side project. If you go to Andong, there is the Korea Research Center for Korean Studies, but following that precedent, we tried to create the Honam Research Center in Gwangju once, but it is drifting now, isn't it? It's strange, so I'm saying that I hope that the service team will take a good look at the status issue or something like that.

Park koo-yong : First of all, I don't know the contents well yet, but I did a service review in the past, so I did it, but anyway, the board is going to be big, so let's see it. next to.

Citizen 4: Since Mike came next to me. I think the second issue is which unit to put it in, because now that it's in service, I'm going to make another judgment, is it realistic, and I think it's more important to first think, is it going to be an institute that fits the international level, international status and authority of this international institute. It didn't just roll in, there was a lot of waiting, and also there are a lot of concerns that it should be able to grow very large, so I think we need to gather the opportunity to see this as a development of some values of 5‧18 going into the future, and in that sense, I think the values and ideology of the institute earlier. You mentioned the freedom part, and I don't think we need to leave out freedom at all, because there is a very strong aspect from yesterday that we reject what we call liberalism, but in fact, have we enjoyed or experienced the true meaning and value of freedom at the same time as liberation, and similarly, there is a part of what we call republic that we skipped. So I think that this idea of democracy/human rights/peace, which is an important value, but on the other hand, freedom and republic, which are somewhat opposed to each other, so that a real international institute is not only about our domestic research, but also about what kind of extension of the values of 5‧18 that we have in Asia, at least in Southeast Asia, I think that this idea of freedom or republic is indispensable. So I think that we should focus on creating an institute at the international level with these values and ideologies. Instead, now the foundation has become a premise for change and you talked about a new integration, but I don't think it's a simple issue, because the current foundation has enough roles that are appropriate for the current level, and there are aspects that this is not the same role or the same nature as the institute, so that's the second issue, because realistically, now the foundation is promoting this, but later it may have to go separately. First of all, I think it will be important to pursue research at an international level that fits the values and ideology, so I think that's what I think. That's all for now.

Park Koo-yong: There's a lot of talk going on, and since we're talking about freedom, I'll advertise a book. I recently released a book, and it's called "The Violence of Freedom." It's a bit thick, 750 pages. I'm an expert on freedom, and when we talk about freedom, the words related to the constitutional order that Dr. Oh Seung-yong mentioned earlier appear in two places. It appears once in the preamble of the constitution, and it appears in Article 4, and the word is not liberal freedom, but to be precise, it is the expression of a liberal democratic basic order. It was originally taken from the German constitution. So in the '87 constitution, there was a discussion to get rid of it, but they couldn't get rid of it, so they added "on the basis of autonomy and harmony" in front of it, so to be precise, according to the current constitutional order, the liberal democratic basic order on the basis of autonomy and harmony, that's the term in the preamble of the constitution, and then the second thing is that in Article 4, when you aim for unification, you have an orientation of what you're going to aim for. This issue needs a little bit of specialized discussion, because there are problems. The strategic discussion is a different issue, it's a strategic issue and I think it needs to be a professional, professional discussion, so let's refrain from that today because it can be a little bit of an exhaustive discussion, and let's focus on the content if we can. On the content, I think you've said as much as you can about the policy, the legal status issues.

Because the service team is going to be thinking about it a lot right now. We have a direction, but when we have a direction, it's the worst direction we have right now. The direction that we're in right now is the worst, right, because you're saying, "This is the direction that we're in, this is the worst," and you need to listen to that, so I think there's a lot of people who are saying, "There's a little bit of a problem with the current foundation and the institute. Do you have anything to say about that, do you think that this direction that we're going with the foundation's affiliated labs needs to be supplemented a little bit, or do you have any brilliant ideas, or do you have any brilliant ideas, because we need to hear a lot of that, and we need a way to solve it. Is there anybody on the panel that would like to say, "No way, this is not going to work." Is there anybody on the panel that would like to say anything about that. Uh, Mr. Councilman. You don't want to take responsibility. (Laughter)

Lim Soo-jeong: I have a question, and it's not a question for Mr. Oh Seung-yong, but a question for the foundation. Now, in March 2022, it became a presidential campaign promise when Yoon Seok-yeol was a candidate, and in May 2022, the presidential transition committee made a policy announcement at the public report in May 2022 that we will create an international free and democratic human rights city in Gwangju. This was a policy issue in the public report from the Regional Balanced Development Committee of the President's Acquisition Commission, but was the international research institute part of the foundation discussed separately? I'm really curious about how the foundation talked to the Ministry of the Interior and Safety and then even to the foundation's affiliated organizations. At least 200 billion won, we will create an international free and democratic human rights city. It's strange that it was announced like this, but it was reduced to 1.3 billion, and I'm curious that it's only being talked about with the foundation. But now that I'm curious about this, I was going to ask a question as a panelist, but I don't think it's a question that Mr. Oh Seung-yong can answer, because we only saw it with the materials provided. But since you are the executive director of the foundation, I would appreciate it if you could answer.

Park Koo Yong : Wait a minute, Mr. Director, can you answer?

Cho Jin-tae : Yes. I'll do it. First of all, 200 billion. Free Democratic Human Rights City. I saw this for the first time here. 200 billion to do it. But there was only this one line in the pledge.

Park koo-yong: It wasn't in the pledge, right? (No, not here)

I'll summarize what you said and what the executive director said in a simpler way. Isn't the pledge made by the key forces in the election? (Yes) Yes, usually when you make a pledge like that, the city must be an important institution in Gwangju, but I don't know, I don't know, I don't know. It was in the pledge, and it was the city that started to ask for it as a policy, and the city did it, and I thought, "I have to consult with the foundation about this," and it's not routine, because it's not routine, so now, but nobody knows, and that's the truth, so yeah, we'll talk about it later. I'd like to end today's discussion with one or two of you saying something like that, and then I'd like to ask you if you have anything to say about it. Isn't this something that should be done as a business, shouldn't we do this, shouldn't we do this, shouldn't we do this, shouldn't we do this, shouldn't we do this, shouldn't we do that elsewhere, and you said something like that. Mike, Mike.

Park koo yong: Yes, I heard you very well. Lastly, on behalf of Chonnam National University, the youngest person, please say something, because you have been a research assistant and administrator for a long time.

Citizen 6: Yes. I don't think it's my place to dare to say anything. (There is no such thing) I hope it goes well and I hope that we can continue to interact like this with the institute. Now I just want to say that we are already doing a lot of projects at the foundation, and this is directly or indirectly with various 5‧18 organizations in Gwangju, and somehow we are communicating or participating, but I don't think that becoming an international research institute will really cut off this or that. So I hope that those parts can be resolved well, and I think that's about the point where I can think a little bit and answer. That's all.

Thank you very much. Would you like to say something, Dr. Seungyong Oh? Dr. kibong Lee.

Citizen 8: I would like to suggest one thing that the international foundation should do. The number of foreigners who come to Korea for business or education is quite large, and Gwangju is also quite large. I think it's very important to have one process to actively inform them about 5‧18. That's all.

Park Koo-yong: Thank you, I was the planning committee chairman of the 5‧18 Memorial Foundation a long time ago, and I worked on the 5‧18 Memorial Foundation with the current executive director, the people in the city, and Mr. Lee Ki-bong. I've been arguing since then, but I don't think it's convincing. Especially this time, since we are creating an international research institute, I want to tell you my opinion again, because I have never heard people in other countries say that the French are globalizing France, for example, let’s say something is B-grade. I'll say again, if you want to create an international institute, you have 5‧18, you have world solidarity, not globalization. You don't do nationalization, you do national solidarity. Everywhere in the world there are similar or similar memories of 5‧18. It's time to connect with that memory, to connect with the world, to connect with the world, to connect with the world, and to protect it. I don't know if it makes sense or not, but let's have world solidarity instead of globalization, so we can create an international institute. We can create researchers. With these words, I would like to conclude today's discussion. Thank you.

Attached. 5‧18 International Institute Agenda Forum: Gwangju Regional Opinion Gathering Public Hearing Part 1.

※ Inquiries. 5‧18 International Institute +82 062-360-0572, nohsy12@518.org