Harold Rogers, interim chief executive of Coupang Corp., requests an opportunity to respond during a National Assembly hearing Friday that examined a data breach and personal information leak at Coupang, alleged unfair trade practices, labor conditions and measures to prevent a recurrence. (Yonhap) The police on Friday questioned Harold Rogers, e-commerce giant Coupang Corp.’s interim CEO, as part of ongoing investigations into a large-scale data breach revealed in November.
Rogers was accompanied by his own interpreter and a police interpreter. During his appearance at the National Assembly in December, his use of a personal interpreter had ignited criticism of how South Korea’s National Assembly handles foreign witnesses.
The developments also cast light on mutual distrust arising from language barriers, and Korean lawmakers’ attitude towards those summoned for questioning, with lawmakers at times shouting and belittling the witnesses.
Rogers appeared three times before the National Assembly in December as lawmakers questioned Coupang over a large-scale personal data leak, alleged unfair trade practices and labor issues.
His appearances were overshadowed by his use of a personal interpreter rather than relying on the official interpretation, which became a sticking point for lawmakers, eventually leading to a string of accusations and grilling from lawmakers.
Science and ICT Committee chair Rep. Choi Min-hee, a lawmaker from the ruling Democratic Party of Korea, repeatedly instructed Rogers to wear the official interpretation earpiece, saying the service had been prepared because his interpreter had paraphrased or inaccurately translated key statements during the previous hearing. Rogers pushed back, saying he had been granted permission to bring his own interpreter and he wished to continue using them.
Rep. Choi’s issue with language led her to accuse Coupang of “playing games” by sending someone who cannot “hold a conversation” with the lawmakers, and “repeating the same answers like a parrot.” The confrontation escalated as some lawmakers demanded “yes or no” answers.
Rogers eventually used both his personal interpreter and the National Assembly’s earpiece.
“From an American viewpoint, the way this was handled could be seen as disregarding the rights of a foreign witness,” Heo Yoon, a professor of international trade at Sogang University’s Graduate School of International Studies, said. According to Heo, in the US Congress, interpreters involved in critical testimony are typically required to swear an oath to translate faithfully without summarizing or reinterpreting statements.
Heo also noted that the episode reflects deeper mutual distrust.
“There may have been concern that even small nuances could change depending on interpretation,” Heo said.
“But running dual interpretation systems can also appear inefficient and unnecessary.”
The issue also carries more serious consequences.
Under Korean law, a witness who gives false testimony at a parliamentary hearing can be punishedwith up to 10 years in prison. While such issues have not arisen yet, the possibility remains that incorrect or overly summarized interpretations could lead to inadvertent false testimony.
Despite the potential legal consequences and appearances by foreign nationals becoming more frequent, the National Assembly does not have a standard practice for providing interpretation for foreign witnesses.
Cases in which foreign executives who do not speak Korean appear as witnesses or reference witnesses at National Assembly audits or standing committee hearings are becoming increasingly common.
Peter Denwood, a US national and CEO of Apple Korea, attended the 2024 National Assembly audit of the Ministry of Economy and Finance. During a parliamentary inquiry into the 2016 humidifier disinfectant scandal, Ata Safdar, head of Oxy Reckitt Benckiser, also appeared before lawmakers.
December’s National Assembly questioning drew sharp reactions both inside and outside the Assembly and spilled into US political discourse. Rep. Carol Miller (R–West Virginia), speaking at a House Ways and Means Trade Subcommittee hearing on digital trade policy in January, cited South Korea as a key example of what she described as discriminatory treatment of US companies.
“Efforts to stifle the free flow of digital trade are most apparent in South Korea,” Miller said, arguing that the National Assembly has continued to advance legislation targeting US firms. She criticized a recently passed amendment to Korea’s Information and Communications Network Act as a “censorship bill,” claiming Seoul had “recently launched a political witch hunt against two American executives.” The remark was widely interpreted as referring to Rogers and Kim.
Experts note that while foreign witnesses have occasionally appeared at South Korea’s National Assembly hearings with company- or embassy-provided interpreters, such cases are treated as exceptions rather than standard practice, and the Korean-language record remains authoritative.
Meanwhile, Rep. Choi’s office did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the growing overseas criticism of the hearing’s tone or on whether she was aware that Rogers had received prior permission to use a personal interpreter.
mkjung@heraldcorp.com