Home > Opinion > Columns

Now the time to reform outdated Constitution

Published: 06 Jan. 2025, 22:00

Kim Jin-pyo
The author is former Speaker of the National Assembly

The abrupt declaration of martial law, an institution believed to belong to the annals of history, has resurfaced after 44 years, exposing the profound limitations of Korea’s 1987 constitutional framework. It has laid bare how the erroneous judgment of a single president can imperil an entire nation in an instant. Few can now deny the necessity of preventing the unchecked recklessness of the imperial presidency.

Since the adoption of the 1987 Constitution, every president has endured scandals involving family or relatives, and three have faced impeachment motions that led to the suspension of their duties. While individual misconduct by presidents has been an issue, the broader problem lies in a system that has reached the end of its historical efficacy.

Despite efforts by myself and other former National Assembly speakers to pursue constitutional reform, tangible results have eluded us. Now is the optimal moment to complete this reform. Calls for change are growing louder among intellectuals and civil society, forcing leading presidential hopefuls to take notice.

Drafted in the wake of the June 1987 pro-democracy movement, the current Constitution reflects the era’s spirit by empowering citizens to directly elect their president. Yet, for 38 years, not a single word of the Constitution has been revised. Korea, once a developing nation, now ranks among the world’s top ten economies and is regarded as a cultural powerhouse and a near-peer developed nation. Despite these achievements, the Constitution remains a relic of a bygone era, unable to keep pace with societal changes. It is akin to a college student wearing a middle school uniform.

Amid a global era of hegemonic competition, Korea must compete rigorously with advanced nations such as the United States, Britain, France and Germany. These countries achieved their status through centuries of accumulated institutional experience across politics, economics, society, and culture. In contrast, Korea’s democratic political system is relatively nascent, and its vulnerabilities were starkly exposed during the recent martial law crisis.

In "How Democracies Die," Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt emphasize that democracy can only endure through “mutual toleration” and the “careful exercise of institutional restraint.” Given Korea’s short history with democracy, the only viable path to realizing these principles is through constitutional reform that institutionalizes a culture of dialogue and compromise in politics.

Previous attempts to amend the Constitution at the presidential and parliamentary levels have repeatedly failed. This is partly due to the rigidity of the Constitution, which requires supermajorities for amendment, and the overreach of trying to address too many issues at once. Realistically, it is challenging to meet the public referendum requirement, which necessitates majority approval from both voters and turnout.

I propose a “minimal amendment” approach, focusing only on issues that garner broad agreement across political and public lines. For instance, a constitutional provision addressing low birthrates — a policy pledge made by both ruling and opposition parties during the April 2020 general election — can serve as a starting point. The so-called “low birthrate amendment” is not only timely but also a mandate from the public to address the existential threat of population decline.

Once the process begins, additional amendments can be discussed and incorporated through bipartisan consensus. Proposals already enjoying widespread agreement — such as enshrining the May 18 Democratic Uprising in the Constitution’s preamble or adopting a four-year presidential term with the possibility of re-election — are likely to be resolved relatively quickly. A four-year presidential term, in particular, could enhance accountability and continuity in governance, enabling the government to address long-term issues and bolster national competitiveness.

Furthermore, measures to check and balance presidential power are imperative. For example, introducing a “responsible prime minister” system, where ruling and opposition parties nominate candidates for the role, could ensure that the prime minister reflects the will of the National Assembly while complementing the president by addressing gaps through public representation.

Now is the time to end the era of the imperial presidency through constitutional reform. The next presidential election, likely to follow the Constitutional Court’s decision on the current impeachment proceedings, must also serve as an opportunity to hold a national referendum on constitutional amendments. Failing to seize this moment risks delaying reform by decades. If Korea’s political leaders cannot achieve this crucial reform, they will bear the burden of historical culpability.

Translated using generative AI and edited by Korea JoongAng Daily staff.