National Assembly Speaker Woo Won-shik wipes his eye while criticizing the main opposition People Power Party (PPP) for requesting a filibuster against a series of bills, including the proposed constitutional amendment, during the second plenary session of the May extraordinary session at the National Assembly in Seoul, May 8. Woo did not bring the constitutional amendment bill to a vote during the session. Yonhap
Korea’s latest attempt at constitutional reform collapsed in the National Assembly last week, undone by the very partisan calculations that make reform necessary in the first place.
At the heart of the failed amendment was a proposal both modest and profoundly important: to tighten constitutional safeguards on the use of martial law. Under the current Constitution, the president retains broad authority to declare martial law in times of war or national emergency, subject only to later review by the National Assembly. The proposed revision would have required prior parliamentary approval and made clear that a majority vote of lawmakers could immediately terminate any such declaration.
In a democracy shaped by painful memories of authoritarian rule, this should not have been controversial.
The amendment also sought to enshrine in the constitutional preamble the democratic legacy of the 1980 Gwangju Uprising and the Busan-Masan Democratic Protests. The conservative People Power Party largely boycotted the proceedings, denying the two-thirds majority required for constitutional amendment bills to pass.
The party’s decision deserves criticism.
For years, conservatives have called for revision to Korea’s constitutional system, saying it concentrates excessive power in the presidency. But when presented with a narrowly focused amendment designed to prevent abuse of one of the most extraordinary presidential powers, they chose obstruction over principle.
A commitment to constitutional reform cannot be conditional on partisan convenience. If a party truly believes in stronger checks and balances, it should support measures that constrain executive authority regardless of who occupies the presidential office.
At the same time, the ruling Democratic Party of Korea is not above reproach.
Its push for this amendment, however substantively justified, also carried an unmistakable political dimension. By forcing a vote on an issue with strong democratic symbolism just weeks before local elections, the party placed its opponents in an uncomfortable position and sought to frame itself as the defender of constitutional democracy.
Source: Korea Times News
