The scandal over the alleged illegal surveillance of civilians by President Lee Myung-bak’s administration is escalating as new allegations are made, this time about activist entertainers put under police surveillance. News reports say that the police kept a watch on them under order from the presidential office.

Upon being called on to verify the allegations, the presidential office says it is in the process of confirming them. But suspicions were raised about the Lee administration having put hidden pressure on broadcasters to remove entertainers critical of its policy from the television and radio programs they had been hosting.

A different kind of allegations is coming from people who were forced out of the top posts of government-funded organizations. They say they resigned under pressure from the administration ― a claim which, if verified, would also smear the image of the Lee administration.

Among them is a former deputy director of the National Intelligence Service who served during the previous administration. When he was CEO of a government-invested corporation until after the Lee administration was inaugurated, he says, he was the target of an audit by the Board of Audit and Inspection and a criminal investigation by the prosecutors’ office. He adds that he continued to be placed under surveillance when he became a civilian and was cleared of all criminal suspicions.

At the center of the snowballing scandal is Justice Minister Kwon Jae-jin, who is accused of being behind the massive surveillance of civilians when he was the senior presidential secretary for civil affairs. It is not just the Democratic United Party and other opposition groups that are demanding that he resign as justice minister and face a criminal inquiry. A similar demand is made by the ruling Saenuri Party.

It is not right for Kwon to keep silent about the accusations, as he has been. He should unequivocally say whether or not he ordered an illegal surveillance on civilians.

This is not to say that his claim to innocence would be a strong defense against an investigation into his involvement in the case. Both the ruling and opposition parties demand that a criminal investigation be launched into the case. The illegal surveillance has already become a politically charged issue of great magnitude ahead of the National Assembly elections.

Nor is it wise of him to resist mounting pressure from political parties to resign as justice minister. His critics would surely cry foul should he keep the post as the prosecutors’ office need to investigate him.

The prosecutors’ office says it is determined to conduct a watertight investigation and deal sternly with any one suspected of a criminal offense regardless of his status. Its determination, however, is discredited by many who wonder why it did not do so when it was investigating the same case two years ago. A better alternative is an investigation by an independent counsel selected by the National Assembly.

The ultimate responsibility, however, lies with President Lee himself, given that his office was involved in the case in one way or another. As such, he needs to speak up on the case, making clear where he stands and what action he intends to take. His silence does nothing but fuel suspicions that he may have been directly involved in the case.

Several days ago, a mid-level presidential secretary for employment said at a news conference that he masterminded the surveillance of a businessman who had posted a video clip ridiculing Lee in his blog. His confession, though regarded as having been made to cover up the involvement of higher-ups, bolstered the conviction that the presidential office, if not the president himself, was behind the illegal surveillance. Later, it was disclosed that surveillance was not limited to the businessman alone but was extended to many other people, including entertainers critical of the Lee administration.

Against his backdrop, the ruling party advises that Lee apologize to the public. But the presidential office says it was not the Lee administration alone that conducted illegal surveillance on civilians but the previous administration did as well. Maybe so. But this allegation does not lighten the severity of its alleged criminal offense.