hankyoreh

President Moon Jae-in speaks during a Cabinet meeting at the Blue House on Mar. 20. (Blue House Photo Pool)

“We, the people of Korea, proud of a resplendent history and traditions dating from time immemorial, upholding the cause of the Provisional Republic of Korea Government born of the March First Independence Movement of 1919 and the democratic ideals of the April Nineteenth Uprising of 1960 against injustice. . . .”

The preamble to the current Constitution of the Republic of Korea includes references to two historic events, the March 1 Independent Movement and the April 19 Uprising of 1960. A proposed amendment to the Constitution by President Moon Jae-in announced by the Blue House on Mar. 20 would add three more: the Bu-Ma Democratic Protests of 1979, the May 18 Democratization Movement of 1980, and the June 10 Struggle of 1987.

The Blue House’s decision to add the three additional historic events to the preamble alongside the March 1919 and April 1960 events is based in the administration’s view of these movements for democracy as key stepping stones in achieving the South Korea of today. In Oct. 1979, students and ordinary citizens in Busan and Masan launched protests against the Yusin dictatorship of then-President Park Chung-hee. While the Park administration suppressed the demonstrations with tanks and martial law decrees, the incident was a direct factor in Park’s subsequent assassination on Oct. 26.

The following May, students and citizens rose up with the Gwangju Democratization Movement in response to President Chun Doo-hwan and the “New Military Administration” seizing power. That spirit of resistance against dictatorship was carried on in the June 10 Struggle of 1987, which led to an amendment of the Constitution to institute direct presidential elections. The April 1960 Uprising, Bu-Ma Protests, May 1980 Democratization Movement, and June 1987 Struggle were all important milestones in achieving democracy in South Korea: the first against the Rhee Syng-man dictatorship, the second against the Park dictatorship, and the last two against Chun’s military regime.

In his election run last year, Moon promised to develop a new preamble that would reflect the three incidents and the candlelight citizens’ revolution that ushered Park Geun-hye out of power. But the plan submitted for the amendment did not include a reference to the candlelight revolution.

“The candlelight citizens’ revolution was not included because it is still happening,” said Blue House Senior Secretary to the President for Civil Affairs Cho Kuk.

The inclusion of the Bu-Ma Protests, May 18, and June 10 in the preamble has the effect of indirectly stipulating the “right of resistance.” Stating his opinion as a constitutional scholar at a Mar. 13 press conference, Yonsei University professor Kim Jong-chul, who is vice chairman of a special citizens’ Constitution advisory committee under the Presidential Commission on Policy and Planning, said, “To list these three historic events and declare the upholding and advancement of democratic ideals as a basic value of the Constitution is to indirectly acknowledge citizens’ right to resistance.”

While the current preamble does indirectly state the right to resistance with its reference to upholding the “democratic ideals of the April Nineteenth Uprising of 1960 against injustice,” the addition of the three incidents since 1960 is seen as reflecting the changing times in the Constitution’s text.

In 2011, the Constitutional Court cited the preamble to the Constitution as a main basis for its ruling finding the Special Act on Asset Confiscation for Pro-Japanese and Anti-National Collaborators to the State constitutional.

“Reckoning with a history of pro-Japanese collaboration is a constitutionally assigned duty based on the preamble of the Constitution, which refers to upholding the cause of the provisional Republic of Korea government established with the March 1 Independence Movement. The unusual instance of retroactive dispossession of pro-Japanese [collaborator] assets may be tolerated within Constitutional ideals,” the court ruled.

As the precedent suggests, the normative effect of the Constitution in connection with the improper exercise of state authority and movements for democracy is expected to increase once the three historic events have been added to the preamble’s text.

By Kim Kyu-nam, staff reporter

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