Ha Dong-geun’s appointment to district heating firm draws fairness questions after lowest screening scores

Ha Dong-geun, president of Korea District Heating Corporation, was appointed despite ranking last in both document screening and interviews for the position, raising questions about the fairness of the selection process. His role as the wedding officiant for Kim Hyun-ji, head of the presidential office’s First Secretariat, prompted suggestions of possible outside interference, but Ha denied any special relationship or prior coordination.

At the National Assembly Climate, Energy, Environment and Labor Committee’s parliamentary audit of public energy corporations on the 19th, lawmakers questioned the propriety of the selection process for Korea District Heating Corporation’s president.

According to documents that lawmaker Na Kyung-won obtained from the corporation, Ha scored 85.8 points in this year’s document screening, ranking eighth among the eight candidates who passed, and 81.42 points in interviews, ranking last among five candidates. No panel member awarded him an A for knowledge and experience in the relevant field in either assessment. Ha was included among the final candidates recommended by the executive candidate recommendation committee and was appointed in April following a nomination by Climate, Energy and Environment Minister Kim Sung-hwan.

Asked by People Power Party lawmaker Na Kyung-won about his relationship with Kim, Ha said he had officiated at about 40 weddings and that hers was one of them. He said officiating had not created a special relationship. He also denied that Kim had encouraged him to apply for the president’s position.

At the parliamentary audit of the Ministry of Climate, Energy and Environment on the 6th, Minister Kim Sung-hwan denied allegations that he had received outside pressure over the appointment from the presidential office or elsewhere. He explained the selection by citing the corporation’s expanding role beyond energy into environmental and ecological fields. The corporation also maintains that the appointment was made lawfully under the relevant laws and procedures.