hankyoreh

A roundtable discussing “the significance of the Park Geun-hye impeachment in political history and contemporary tasks for South Korean politics

“Ironically, the impeachment of President Park Geun-hye has the historical character of a judgment based on democratic, Constitutional procedures on the 30th anniversary of [South Korea’s] democratization against the President who did the most to violate democratic procedures.”

This was the message delivered by Incheon National University political science professor Lee Jun-han in his presentation at a Dec. 8 National Assembly roundtable on “the significance of the Park Geun-hye impeachment in political history and contemporary tasks for South Korean politics.” The discussion was co-organized by Democratic Party lawmaker Woo Sang-ho and the Korea Institute for the Future (KIF) for the first anniversary of the National Assembly’s vote to impeach Park on Dec. 9 of last year.

During the discussion, the institution and Woo distributed a white paper titled “The Impeachment: A 100-Day Record,” containing a record of the events that took place in the political sector during the impeachment.

“The cover was designed to be black, symbolizing the darkness in the Republic of Korea before the impeachment,” explained Woo, who served as the Democratic Party’s control tower directing the impeachment effort in the National Assembly at the time.

“On the back cover is a fist holding a candle, with white light shining from it. It signifies that this is a book symbolizing the past year,” he added.

The discussion’s moderator, KIF director Kim Gi-sik, explained the purpose of the event.

“Woo Sang-ho is a case with few precedents in world history as someone who was a leading figure in the [democratization] movement in the streets 30 years ago and a leading figure in the impeachment in parliament 30 years later,” Kim said.

“I see him as a symbolic illustration of the history of the development of democracy in South Korea,” he added.

“Clearly, it was the candle-holding members of the public who were instrumental in Park Geun-hye’s impeachment. At the same time, it is only when we accurately identify how the National Assembly operated as a representative body in the impeachment process that we can develop democracy within an institutional framework,” Kim continued. “That was the sense in which this discussion was organized.”

Participants in the discussion assessed the meaning of the candlelight demonstrations last year in comparison with the June Democratization Struggle of 1987, which resulted in the ninth and current Constitution.

“While the 2016 demonstrations were aimed at punishing violations of the Constitution by Park Geun-hye and upholding the spirit of the Constitution, the June Struggle in 1987 was an attempt address the undemocratic nature of the indirect Presidential election system and to amend the Constitution to institute direct elections, so there’s a large difference,” Lee Jun-han said.

Kim Gi-sik noted that while the June Struggle resulted in the current Constitution, it was “incomplete in that it failed to fully avoid dictatorial regimes.”

“At the same time, I get the sense that the revolution that was not achieved with the June Struggle in 1987 was completed 30 years later when Park was impeached according to the Constitution,” he said.

Kim also noted that the June Struggle “was divided in time between the struggle and the street campaign leading up to the funeral of Lee Han-yeol (a student who was killed during a pro-democracy demonstration in June 1987), and then the institutional amendment of the Constitution in the National Assembly after that.”

“In contrast, the impeachment process had a different significance from the June Struggle in that the struggles in the National Assembly and on the streets took place interactively at the same time,” he added.

Future tasks were also addressed in various discussions. Lee Jun-han called for “changing the system so that checks and balances thoroughly apply to the President; drastically reducing the President’s authorities in terms of legislation, the budget, and appointments; and requiring the President to abide by the Constitution and the law to guarantee personal, press, and corporate freedoms.”

During the discussion, Korea University sociology professor Kim Yoon-tae said the “demands that erupted during the candlelight demonstrations leading to the impeachment have not been properly represented by the political parties or administration.”

“There’s a growing sense of concern that the demands of the candlelight revolution will be blocked by the ruling party’s lack of a majority in the National Assembly,” he said.

“It’s a dilemma situation where the citizen revolution stops the moment it succeeds.”

To solve the citizen’s revolution dilemma, Kim called for “active efforts from the administration to clear away deep-rooted vices, uphold the damaged principle of the rule of law, and achieve an economically democratic welfare state.”

“We also need to institutionalize the candlelight citizens’ revolution by amending the Constitution to strengthen basic citizen rights and parliamentary powers, and to reform the election system with something like the German mixed-member proportional model or the Sweden group representation constituency system, which will allow the public’s various political demands to be expressed effectively,” he suggested.

Hankyoreh senior reporter Seong Han-yong called for “institutional reforms to complete the clearing away of deep rooted vices,” adding that this meant “amending the Constitution and the law.”

“There can be no institutional reforms without the opposition’s cooperation. The political responsibility for that must be assumed by President Moon Jae-in and the Democratic Party,” he said.

Seong noted that Moon “has promised on numerous occasions that the new administration would be a ‘Democratic Party administration’ rather than the ‘Moon Jae-in administration.’”

“For it to be a Democratic Party administration, policy-making authority needs to be assigned to the party in practical terms, such as by assigning presidential powers to the party leader, floor leaders, and policy committee chair, with a party-government council making nearly all the important policy decisions while the Blue House takes a step back,” he said.

Lawmaker Ki Dong-min said, “As discussions on amending the Constitution pick up ahead of next year’s local elections, we need to include issues related to the political system, making efforts to address the limitations shown by the 1987 Constitutional system – including decentralizing powers, respecting life and human rights, and guaranteeing environmental and various other social rights – and create a new Constitutional order capable of embracing social change.”

People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy secretary-general Ahn Jin-geol, who helped prepare the candlelight demonstrations on the ground, said the candlelight citizens’ revolution “must continue until public welfare issues are resolved and welfare democracy and a welfare state are achieved.”

By Kim Kyu-nam, staff reporter

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