(EDITORIAL from Korea Times on March 5)
Rekindling constitutional revision
Amend Constitution to check against imperial presidency
With the Constitutional Court expected to decide on whether to uphold the impeachment of President Yoon Suk Yeol for his Dec. 3 martial law imposition, some of the potential contenders in a possible early presidential election have proposed a constitutional revision. There have been growing calls to rewrite South Korea’s Constitution, which had been implemented in 1987 to enable direct election of the president by voters and limit the presidency to a single five-year term.
The key contention is that despite the single-term limit, power is heavily concentrated with the president and not kept in check sufficiently. The current political mayhem may well have driven up the electorate’s support for constitutional revision. Several polls conducted since December have shown that more than 50 percent of the electorate, on average, support a constitutional revision. The National Assembly has passed the impeachment of three presidents — Yoon, former President Roh Moo-hyun in 2004 and former President Park Geun-hye in 2016 — with the impeachment for Park upheld by the Constitutional Court. These developments prompted the criticism that the Constitution of 1987 is ill-equipped to function and serve this time and era. It is seen as concentrating power in the hands of a president who retains grip on the ruling party leadership.
Seizing the moment, Han Dong-hoon, former leader of the People Power Party (PPP), proposed revising the Constitution to allow for two possible four-year terms, while also recommending that whoever takes office in the next presidential election holds a shortened term of only three years. He was seconded by Seoul Mayor Oh Se-hoon and Daegu Mayor Hong Joon-pyo, two conservative contenders in the possible presidential race, although Hong opposed the shorter term. A constitutional revision has also received backing from prominent figures of the liberal main opposition Democratic Party of Korea (DPK), such as Gyeonggi Province Gov. Kim Dong-yeon, former Prime Minister Kim Boo-kyum and former South Gyeongsang Province Gov. Kim Kyoung-soo. The election’s anticipated forerunners, DPK leader Rep. Lee Jae-myung and conservative Labor Minister Kim Moon-soo, remain highly cautious toward a constitutional revision.
Their prudence may well result from the pressures they face — the Constitutional Court’s decision on Yoon, the appellate court’s pending ruling on the DPK leader’s election law violation trial and the possible snap election. In fact, as lofty as the idea behind a constitutional revision is, the timing of its discussion has almost always been affected by the political interests of either of the two main parties in recent history. Any attempts to revise the Constitution, which upholds the nation’s democratic government in structure and spirit, would require a wisely dedicated — not politically dictated — discussion and negotiations from a special committee comprising experts from diverse fields.
But South Korea’s concentration of power in the presidency has demonstrated that it can produce major side effects. The most recent political turmoil wrought by the martial law declaration has pushed South Korea’s ranking in the Economist Intelligence Unit report down to 32nd out of 167 countries in 2024, from 22nd in 2022, downgrading it to a “flawed democracy.” It’s a dismal outcome for a nation that not only found pride in achieving economic growth and prosperity in such a short time but also achieved democracy in the process. Aware of the changed sociopolitical landscape, the DPK’s leader has said that “we cannot not revise the Constitution.”
We hope those words reflect — as should the words of the ruling party contenders — the recognition that an earnest review of the principles that uphold our democratic system can and should take place to reflect the zeitgeist as well as the changing sociopolitical landscape to serve the public and the nation’s best interests.
(END)
