Discussions on constitutional reform have resurfaced as a central issue in South Korean politics. Voices within the ruling party are calling for a swift push for reform, reigniting debates in the National Assembly. However, significant differences remain between the ruling and opposition parties regarding the timing and direction of power restructuring, suggesting that any actual discussions may face considerable challenges. The future of changing the constitutional framework, which has been in place for nearly 40 years since 1987, ultimately depends on how much common ground the parties can find.
According to political sources on September 9, the ruling party is considering key proposals, including a four-year presidential term and the decentralization of presidential powers. The aim is to enhance accountability in governance by allowing the president to seek re-election and to ensure continuity in long-term policy initiatives. While the opposition acknowledges the need for reform, they advocate for a cautious approach regarding the timing and specifics of the discussions. They argue that any reform should not be driven by the interests of a particular administration or political faction, emphasizing the necessity for extensive public discourse and bipartisan agreement.
Earlier, President Lee Jae-myung stated in a written interview with the French daily Le Monde on September 7 that constitutional reform is necessary to strengthen presidential accountability and better distribute power. He also mentioned the possibility of transitioning from the current five-year single term to a four-year term with re-election, indicating he would consider shortening his own term if needed.
Kim Min-seok, leader of the Democratic Party, also brought up the topic of constitutional reform during a speech at the National Assembly. He stated, "We will pursue a feasible constitutional amendment that reflects the changes of the times and the demands of the people while adhering to the procedural spirit of the current constitution and laws." Recently, the chair of the National Assembly's negotiation group, Cho Jeong-sik, sparked controversy by stating that a constitutional amendment regarding the re-election of the sitting president is a matter for the public to decide, suggesting that Kim's emphasis on public consensus regarding the speed and scope of reform is significant.
In contrast, the People Power Party has made it clear that it will not participate in discussions on constitutional reform during this administration's term. While the ruling party is attempting to ignite discussions ahead of next year's local elections, the main opposition party's declaration to refuse negotiations has led to an immediate standoff. Floor leader Jeong Jeong-sik criticized President Lee's mention of a re-election amendment, stating, "I will never say, 'I won't seek re-election' or 'I will face trial.' This implies an intention to extend the term through constitutional reform and delay legal proceedings." He firmly stated, "There will be no constitutional reform under this government," expressing opposition to the initiative.
Ultimately, the key question is whether the ruling and opposition parties can reach an agreement that transcends political self-interest. In the past, conflicts surrounding power structure and term issues have repeatedly arisen whenever the need for reform was raised, yet these discussions have not led to actual amendments. This time, despite a general consensus on the broader framework, there is a high likelihood that specific details will lead to direct clashes of interest.
Particularly, the differences in positions regarding power structure reform are seen as the most significant variable. Various proposals are being discussed, ranging from maintaining the presidential system while changing to a four-year term with re-election, to a decentralized presidential system that distributes powers to the National Assembly and the government, as well as parliamentary or dual executive systems. The procedural hurdles are also considerable. A constitutional amendment requires the approval of at least two-thirds of the National Assembly members and must subsequently go to a national referendum. Without cooperation between the ruling and opposition parties, it will be challenging to even bring a reform proposal to the National Assembly.
A political insider remarked, "This is not merely a matter of adjusting the presidential term; it involves changing the entire framework of governance. It should not be pursued based on the political interests of specific parties or administrations. If each party begins to advocate for constitutional amendments that favor their own interests, it will likely end up in the same contentious debates as in the past." They added, "Rather than rushing to set a timeline, we should engage in thorough discussions to create a constitutional amendment that the public can accept, starting with how to adjust presidential powers and the role of the National Assembly."
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.