As Court rules on impeachment, a call for reform over power struggles

Home > Opinion > Columns

As Court rules on impeachment, a call for reform over power struggles

Published: 04 Apr. 2025, 00:01

Audio report: written by reporters, read by AI

Kim Jung-ha

The author is the politics editor at the JoongAng Ilbo.

At 11 a.m. today, the Constitutional Court is set to deliver a landmark ruling on President Yoon Suk Yeol’s impeachment, a decision likely to send profound ripples through the nation’s already turbulent political landscape. Given the extensive authority vested in the presidency, the outcome, whichever way it leans, is certain to resonate deeply throughout society.

Yet interpreting the past 123 days — marked by martial law, political paralysis and an unprecedented impeachment process — as merely a struggle for political dominance oversimplifies a deeper, more structural crisis facing Korea’s democratic institutions. Politicians may prefer to view it narrowly as a fight for power, but responsible leadership should seize this moment as a historic opportunity to address persistent systemic flaws in governance.

Present and former politicians chant slogans calling for constitutional reform at Seoul Station on March 5. [NEWS1]

Indeed, the Constitutional Court’s verdict must not merely represent an endpoint to a divisive chapter but rather initiate comprehensive and meaningful political reforms aimed at resolving longstanding abuses and inefficiencies in Korea’s political framework.

At the forefront of these persistent issues is the contentious debate surrounding constitutional reform. Critics have long argued that Korea’s current single-term, five-year presidency concentrates excessive authority in one individual, leading inevitably to a cycle of power abuse, political gridlock and inefficiency. Advocates for constitutional revision call for decentralizing executive power, a shift toward structures that encourage consensus and shared responsibility. However, attempts to achieve constitutional amendments have traditionally led to complex and contentious parliamentary debates, often ending in gridlock and frustration.

Given these realities, an effective political reform strategy should also prioritize immediately achievable reforms alongside long-term constitutional goals. One such readily actionable objective is reforming the National Assembly’s electoral system — a change achievable without altering the Constitution itself.

Currently, Korea utilizes a single-member district electoral system in which only the candidate with the most votes secures a seat, while all other votes in the district effectively go to waste. This winner-takes-all system frequently generates significant distortions between voter preferences and parliamentary representation.

For example, during last year’s general elections, the Democratic Party (DP) secured 50.5 percent of constituency votes, while the People Power Party (PPP) received 45.1 percent. Yet, seat distribution revealed a stark imbalance, with DP gaining 161 seats compared to just 90 for PPP. Such pronounced distortions significantly undermine democratic legitimacy and deepen voter disenchantment.

Adopting multimember districts could substantially address these distortions by allowing multiple representatives per district. This system considerably reduces the number of wasted votes and aligns electoral outcomes more closely with actual voter preferences. Such reforms would also weaken entrenched regional divisions. Under multimember districts, DP candidates could find increased electoral opportunities in traditionally conservative regions like the Gyeongsang provincial region, while PPP candidates could similarly break into traditionally progressive strongholds such as Jeolla provincial region. Consequently, regionalism would decline, voter choices would expand, and a more dynamic multiparty parliamentary system could emerge.

Furthermore, presidential election reform should also be seriously pursued, notably by introducing a runoff voting system. Since Korea's constitutional revision of 1987, only former President Park Geun-hye has managed to secure a clear electoral majority, winning just over 51 percent of the vote.

The Constitutional Court flag is seen in front of the court building in Jongno District, central Seoul, on Marh 27. [CHUN MIN-KYU]

Presidents who assume office without a mandate are inherently vulnerable, politically weakened from the outset. A runoff voting system — where the two candidates with the most votes proceed to a second round of balloting — would ensure that every president is elected with majority backing, thus enhancing their legitimacy and strengthening democratic governance.

Critics have argued that Article 67(2) of the Constitution, which specifies procedures for electoral ties, could complicate the introduction of runoff elections. However, this particular provision, originally intended for highly improbable circumstances, could reasonably be reinterpreted to accommodate runoff elections without violating constitutional principles. Overly rigid interpretations should not obstruct practical reforms essential to strengthening democratic institutions.

Additionally, reform efforts should also target parliamentary voting procedures within the National Assembly. Expanding the practice of secret ballots would empower legislators to vote based on conscience rather than coercive party directives.

Under the current system, open voting restricts the independence of lawmakers, making dissent difficult without jeopardizing their political futures. Greater reliance on confidential voting — apart from specific situations requiring public accountability — would encourage bipartisan collaboration, reduce partisan paralysis, and foster a more constructive legislative environment. Legislators could then prioritize the national interest over narrow party politics, helping cultivate a healthier democratic dialogue.

Importantly, these proposed reforms — electoral system changes, presidential runoff voting and expanded secret balloting — are achievable and pragmatic. They require political will more than structural upheaval. Implementing these measures would significantly enhance democratic responsiveness, restore public confidence in government institutions and reduce recurring cycles of political instability.

Ultimately, Korea now stands at a critical crossroads. Today's Constitutional Court ruling represents a unique moment for genuine political transformation. The conservative and liberal parties must rise above immediate political rivalries and seize this opportunity to articulate a clear, coherent and visionary blueprint for sustainable political reform. Korea deserves a political system resilient enough to withstand crises, flexible enough to reflect public sentiment accurately and robust enough to prevent repeated political turmoil.

The Constitutional Court’s decision, in other words, should not simply end one crisis — it should ignite a new era of political maturity and democratic strength.

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