[Reporter’s notebook] What happens if Pres. Park is not changed

Posted on : 2016-11-05 12:12 KST Modified on : 2019-10-19 20:29 KST
Amid Choi Sun-sil scandal, Park obviously wishes to cling to power, and there are limited options for ousting her
After apologizing for the Choi Sun-sil scandal
After apologizing for the Choi Sun-sil scandal

There’s nothing more dispiriting than hearing someone talking about “next week” in a zero-visibility situation where it’s tough to see even an hour into the future. The news is bringing so many details about abuse of power that it’s difficult to digest it all - yet the president only feeds the anger with her apologies and feeds suspicions with her explanations. Seeing day after day of this is enough to leave the South Korean people with “abnormal spirits,” as Park herself put it. Park and the Choi Sun-sil faction started the fire, and now citizens across all walks of life are wracking their brains trying to fix things. But the universe doesn’t seem to be offering its full support just yet.

How are we to normalize the abnormal situation of Park holding onto the legal position of president when she’s already been impeached in the minds of her public? There are basically two scenarios here: either Park fills out the remaining year and four months of her term, or she leaves the Blue House before her term ends.

The first scenario involves keeping Park in office on the grounds that whatever is happening, a vacuum in constitutional government must be avoided. An example of this is a plan politicians are discussing in which Park would step back from the front lines and form a neutral national Cabinet. This is seen as an opportunity to gauge whether the National Assembly is capable of steering the ship of state and maintaining constitutional order with the president effectively absent - and perhaps to stage a trial run for a decentralized presidential system.

Park not finishing her term would mean either resignation or impeachment. If she resigns, an election would have to be held within 60 days to choose a new president to serve a five-year term. The sudden departure and preparations for a vote would be predicted to plunge the state into major chaos - but it would be a swift way of relieving the current government paralysis in a way that suits the public’s views. It would also set a historical precedent for a leader being driven out by the power of the people for trampling on the Constitution, which would be more instructive for posterity than any Constitutional law, political science, or history textbook.

The other approach, impeachment, is the only legally guaranteed means of dealing with a president who has laid waste to the Constitution. The National Assembly would pass motion for impeachment, suspending the President from performing her duties. While the Constitutional Court is holding its hearing, an acting President would be brought in to run things. Depending on how things turn out, either Park would be reinstated or an early election would be held. This is the “responsible legal means” available to the National Assembly, which holds authority for an impeachment motion.

The problem is that neither of these approaches is simple. Even if Park agrees to only handle foreign affairs and national defense, would her authority there be recognized? It is certainly tough to picture a South Korea-US summit with both Park and a “Prime Minister entrusted with full authority” attending. And as Park’s Nov. 4 address to the public showed, Park seems to have no intention of delegating full power to parliament.

The chances of Park stepping down herself are even slimmer. Longtime observers say of her that her only interest is power and that she would never resign of her own accord. The aggressive plays from Park that have so flummoxed the opposition - her proposal to amend the Constitution, her nomination of Kim Byong-joon as Prime Minister and Han Gwang-ok as Chief of Staff - are being seen by ruling party insiders as her way of saying she has no plans to release the reins going ahead.

There certainly are grounds for pursuing the other option - impeachment. But actually going through with it could result in a different situation unfolding as national divisions deepen. South Koreans of all political stripes can recall the trauma of the 2004 impeachment of then-President Roh Moo-hyun (2003-2008). An impeachment motion would have be passed by two-thirds of more of the National Assembly, or 200 members. At the moment, it is unclear if more than 29 of the Saenuri Party’s 129 lawmakers will even agree to a vote. This accounts for the lament by many that Park “is carrying on like she is because the National Assembly can’t actually impeach her.”

Park still hasn’t changed. Instead, she has held onto her seat and power as president and continues managing the situation with the support of her accomplices in the government interference scandal. It’s hard to find any political leaders an angry public can turn to and think, “Thank God you guys are here.” That’s why the chaos - the meetings between the president and opposition party leaders, the debate over a national Cabinet, the calls for Park’s resignation from in and outside the political world - appear very likely to continue for now. The people’s candles will have to keep burning too.

By Hwang Jun-beom, staff reporter

Please direct questions or comments to [english@hani.co.kr

button that move to original korean article (클릭시 원문으로 이동하는 버튼)

Related stories