This year marks the 70th anniversary of our National Assembly. Since its founding under the original 1948 Constitution the Assembly has travelled a long and winding road. It is now time for the Assembly to be reborn. It should no longer be a political battle field. It must rise up to its status as the people’s true representative body that stands at the center of the nation’s policy-making process.
Let us first probe into the relationship between political parties and the Assembly. By probing the peculiar environment in which the political parties and the Assembly were founded and evolved we can start to analyze why the Assembly is not functioning properly. Today’s democratic politics in many democratic nations is centered on parliamentary politics and party politics. In the case of Korea, however, the parties practically dominate the inner workings of the Assembly.
In the West parliamentary democracy took a long time to take root as people had to fight for their rights and resist usurpation by the King or other authorities. Political parties came into being after the establishment of parliamentary democracy. In western democracies the rise of political parties took place over a long period of time. Thus, the parliament and political parties were able to achieve some kind of balance of power, and the parliament still maintains its sphere of influence as an independent institution.
Looking at England as an example the year 1295 is widely considered to mark the birth of the modern day parliament. The emergence of political parties took place 360 years later when, in 1660, the Whigs and the Tories split over the sovereign rights of Charles II. In the case of United States, the colonies had already adopted English-style parliamentary democracy in the 17th century. The political parties, however, did not emerge until 1787 when the Constitution was written. Also in the case of France, Germany and other continental nations parliamentary democracy was adopted right after the French Revolution of 1789 but the political parties did not emerge until the mid-1800’s.
In the case of Korea the National Assembly and political parties emerged almost simultaneously. As mentioned above this is very different from the West where the parliament had sufficient time to lay down its roots and could enjoy some independence from political parties. In Korea political parties came to dominate the Assembly in a short period of time.
When it rains it pours. Unlike political parties in the West which are more grassroots, meaning they evolved from bottom-up, Korea’s political parties came into being in a somewhat arbitrary manner, meaning they were set up top-down. Around the time of the founding of the National Assembly under the original Constitution of 1948 there were as many as 47 parties and societies. For a long time thereafter most political parties, regardless of whether they were the ruling or the minority parties, were set up arbitrarily, centered on charismatic individuals, and engaged in partisan politics. Inner workings of these parties are far from being democratic. In fact, the organizational structure and procedures strongly resemble oligarchies.
Korea’s political parties dominate the Assembly and, because they dominate the Assembly, the very policies chosen by the parties equate to national policies. If those policies, however, are agreed upon in an undemocratic and oligarchic manner what would happen to those policies when they are put to the vote at the Assembly?
When unreasonable factors interfere with the workings of the Assembly the legislative process at the Assembly itself becomes unreasonable. When the parties are at odds with each other the Assembly becomes the battle field and orderly legislative process cannot be expected. We have gone through 70 years of this unreasonable process and this is what our Assembly really looks like.
For the reasons mentioned above the Assembly will not be able to function as a compromising ground. Rather it will inevitably offer itself as the battle field for the parties. If the battles are fought over policy issues that would be fine. As we have often seen in the past, however, the legislative process has repeatedly been crippled or otherwise not effective. The Assembly, which should be the center of legislative process, has instead become the battle field for the Assembly members waving their parties’ flags.
On top of this domination by the political parties the executive branch, led by the all mighty President, has been outmuscling the Assembly as well. Squeezed between the President and the parties the Assembly’s sphere of activities became very narrow. Despite having all the external features of modern day parliaments the real inner workings of the Assembly fall far short.
Following the Democracy Proclamation of 29 March 1987 the Korean society became more democratic. It is doubtful, however, as to how free the Assembly is from the influence of parties or the President.
Now that we have observed this unparliamentary behavior for so long we must consider the causes and solutions to this problem. This is because the parties’ domination of the Assembly has just gone too far.
The first key to this problem lies in instilling democratic structure and procedures at political parties. At the same time the party leaders must think and lead rationally. This is also true on a theoretical basis. As set out in Article 8 of the Constitution each party’s structure and activities should be democratic and add value to the national policy making process. On this basis, and on this basis only, can the parties’ domination of the Assembly be justified.
The reform of Korean politics must begin with the reform of political parties. If the parties are not communicating, debating and compromising with each other there is little chance that the Assembly can operate smoothly.
Under the current governance structure of parties the party leaders, regardless of whether or not they are currently members of the Assembly, have all the authority and accountability. As in the case of advanced western democratic nations the center of power must shift to parties’ Floor leaders during normal times and shift back to party leaders during election campaign period.
I would like to take this opportunity to appeal to party leaders and other influential political figures. Do not sway according to the fickle tastes of the populace nor fall to carnal temptations. Look ahead to the next 100 years and continue to purify and reform the inner workings of your parties. This is why political parties exist in the first place and this is how you can rescue the Assembly and serve the country at large.
The next thing we can think about is making the Assembly stronger from within. The issue is how to make each Assembly member more independent and self-driven. The Assembly belongs to Assembly members, not political parties.
At the present Assembly members cannot be said to represent the people. They are associates of their parties. And when they violate some rules the Assembly does not even know how to keep them in line. This is why we are pushing to restore respect and authority for the Speaker of the Assembly and guarantee the independence of Assembly members.
The basic solution is to guarantee the independence of each Assembly member since he or she was chosen directly by constituent voters. Unlike the United States, however, a candidate is not chosen by constituent voters but rather through parties’ internal nomination procedure. Under these circumstances it is difficult to expect Assembly members to act independently of their parties’ wishes.
Theoretically Korea’s Assembly members, under Article 114, Paragraph 2 of the National Assembly Act, enjoy the Constitutional immunity in speaking out freely and have the power and freedom to vote according to their conscience. But again this is far from reality.
In closing I would like to offer an advice to the Speaker of the Assembly. Going forward please refrain from using the facilities of the National Assembly for political parties events that are not related to the main activities of the Assembly. The US’s tight regulation of Congress facilities can be a good example to follow. By restricting the use of Assembly facilities to the Assembly’s main activities people will start to form a better image of the National Assembly.
Jong-Heup Park, CCSJ Legislation Monitoring Committee Chair
