[Editorial] Withholding National Pension Meeting Minutes from Public Disclosure Contradicts President Lee's Philosophy of 'Transparent Governance' (January 28, 2026)
- #국민연금법
![[Editorial] Withholding National Pension Meeting Minutes from Public Disclosure Contradicts President Lee's Philosophy of 'Transparent Governance' (January 28, 2026)](/uploads/2026/01/1769667427618.jpg)
The National Pension has decided to withhold until 2030 the minutes of the January 26 portfolio review meeting, which contained discussions on increasing the domestic equity allocation.
As a general practice, the National Pension Fund Committee discloses meeting minutes in the year following the meeting. However, non-disclosure is permissible where there is risk of interfering with the activities of Fund Committee members.
On the grounds that the present minutes could expose the National Pension's policy direction and investment strategy, it was decided that disclosure would be deferred for four years following the non-disclosure determination.
This decision, however, raises serious questions. It is difficult to regard as justifiable the fact that a consequential decision made by the National Pension has been placed in a blind spot with respect to the public's right to know.
The National Pension is a public fund managing 1,500 trillion won of the public's retirement savings. Accountability and transparency commensurate with that responsibility must be a prerequisite.
Moreover, this decision stands in direct contradiction to President Lee Jae-myung's stated philosophy of "transparent governance."
President Lee has maintained that the greater the authority exercised, the greater the obligation to disclose and explain. By that logic, decisions governing the management of pensions—which determine the retirement security of citizens—ought to be the first domain subject to transparency. And yet, the minutes have been withheld for four years.
The greatest asset of the National Pension is public trust.
Trust is not sustained by temporarily strong investment returns alone. A pension system earns public support when its management processes are transparent, its decision-making is insulated from political interference, and it stands prepared to account for itself before the public.
The more contentious a decision, the greater the imperative to document and disclose it. A decision to withhold does nothing but give the impression of deferring accountability to the future. The "transparent governance" invoked by President Lee must serve as a standard of practice, not merely a declaration.
The National Pension should reconsider its decision to withhold the meeting minutes and, at a minimum, proceed with a level of disclosure and explanation sufficient to address the questions raised by the citizenry.
That is the course consistent both with the philosophy of transparent governance and with the responsibilities of an institution entrusted with the retirement security of the citizenry.
