Korea's presidential candidates want constitutional reform. Experts say they don't go far enough.

Home > National > Politics

Korea's presidential candidates want constitutional reform. Experts say they don't go far enough.

Published: 30 May. 2025, 07:00

MICHAEL LEE
[email protected]

Audio report: written by reporters, read by AI

Democratic Party candidate Lee Jae-myung, left, and People Power Party candidate Kim Moon-soo, right, have both issued proposals for constitutional reform on the campaign trail. [YONHAP]

[EXPLAINER]

With less than a week to go before the June 3 snap election, the issue of constitutional reform reared its head at the third and final presidential debate on Wednesday, with candidates calling for sweeping changes to curb what many have decried as the excesses of Korea’s “imperial presidency.”

The push for reform follows a political maelstrom triggered by former President Yoon Suk Yeol’s declaration of martial law last December — a move that intensified demands for safeguards against executive overreach.

In a Gallup Korea survey released last month, 67 percent of respondents said they supported revising the Constitution to limit presidential power while only 21 percent opposed change.

That sentiment has injected momentum into a debate over constitutional reform that has percolated for years but rarely made it past political rhetoric.

But legal scholars warn that the blueprints unveiled by Lee Jae-myung of the liberal Democratic Party (DP) and Kim Moon-soo of the conservative People Power Party (PPP) fail to address the underlying flaws in Korea’s balance of power.

What the candidates suggest

Current law limits Korean presidents to a single five-year term, a post-authoritarian measure designed to prevent the consolidation of power. Both Lee and Kim have proposed allowing future presidents to serve two four-year terms instead — a change that would begin in 2030 under Lee’s plan or as early as 2028 under Kim’s.

The DP candidate has advocated for a runoff electoral system in which the top two candidates would advance to a second vote if neither secured a majority in the first round.

Lee has also proposed restructuring the prime minister’s role. While the position is currently appointed by the president with parliamentary consent, the DP candidate wants it filled by a lawmaker who commands the National Assembly’s confidence, effectively transforming the executive branch into a semi-presidential system.

Lee further suggested that politically sensitive appointees — including the heads of investigative agencies — should be subject to legislative approval. He also supports bringing the Board of Audit and Inspection (BAI), a key oversight body, under direct parliamentary supervision.

Kim has echoed some of Lee’s structural suggestions, including that of a two-term presidency. But under his reform timetable, the next president should serve only a three-year transitional term to allow the new system to take effect in 2028.

In contrast to Lee’s emphasis on increasing parliamentary checks on the presidency, Kim has focused on improving legal and institutional transparency. He has proposed eliminating the president’s immunity to criminal prosecution and lifting similar protections for lawmakers.

He has also called for more stringent requirements for judicial nominations, recall elections for legislators and a system that would allow ordinary citizens to introduce bills to the legislature.

Are these reforms enough?

Despite the candidates’ ambitious platforms, constitutional experts argue that these proposals miss the mark when it comes to meaningfully constraining presidential power.

“Imposing limits on the president’s power to appoint judges is arguably the most critical reform needed,” said Chang Young-soo, a professor of constitutional law at Korea University. He pointed to a recent controversy over the refusal of Yoon’s deputies to fill a vacant seat on the Constitutional Court during his suspension from office.

“The president continues to wield considerable influence over the judiciary through his authority to nominate the chief justice of the Supreme Court and control appointments to the Constitutional Court,” Chang added. “That dynamic effectively elevates the executive branch above the judiciary, undermining the separation of powers.”

Lim Ji-bong, a professor of constitutional law at Sogang University, shared similar concerns, noting that even though the appointment of the chief justice is subject to legislative approval, the position carries broad powers to shape the judiciary.

“The chief justice of the Supreme Court can simply appoint other members of the judiciary once he is seated,” Lim said.

“The current system should be overhauled so that all major judicial and executive branch appointments require the Assembly’s consent.”

Symptoms of deeper failings?

Beyond institutional design, scholars say that Korea’s political culture — particularly the tendency of ruling party lawmakers to align closely with the president — compounds the imbalance of power.

“While lawmakers in other democracies do challenge presidents from their own party, Korea’s ruling parties typically fall in line behind the president, offering little resistance,” Chang said. “In effect, meaningful checks disappear when both the executive and legislative branches are dominated by the same party — they tend to operate as a single entity.”

He cautioned that Korea’s intensifying political polarization could hamper the effectiveness of government bodies like the BAI, even if reforms placed them under greater parliamentary control.

From left: Lee Jae-myung of the Democratic Party, Kwon Young-kook of the Democratic Labor Party, Kim Moon-soo of the People Power Party and Lee Jun-seok of the Reform Party pose for a commemorative photograph before the third and final presidential candidates' debate at the MBC studio in Mapo District, western Seoul, on May 27. [JOINT PRESS CORPS]

The extent of partisan division was on full display at Wednesday’s televised debate, where candidates endorsed the need for constitutional reform — while trading blame for the nation’s political gridlock.

Some elements of Lee’s and Kim’s proposals, however, appear to be decent first steps.

In particular, the possibility of re-election could compel better presidential conduct, according to Lim.

“With the current single-term limit, presidents have little incentive to govern with long-term accountability,” Lim said. “Allowing re-election would force them to answer more directly to the public.”

He also endorsed elements of both Lee’s and Kim’s proposals that could deepen democratic responsiveness, including a confidence vote for the prime minister and recall elections for lawmakers.

Can reform happen this time?

Efforts to amend Korea’s constitution have historically faced stiff political headwinds since it underwent its last major revision in 1987, which reinstated direct presidential elections. The last serious attempt at reform in 2018, spearheaded by then-President Moon Jae-in, stalled amid partisan gridlock in the National Assembly.

Although calls for constitutional amendments have featured in past presidential campaigns, Korea’s leaders retreated from such promises once in office, wary of curbing their own authority.

While Chang declined to speculate on whether the next president would follow through on reform that predecessors have eschewed, he emphasized the urgency of the task.

“The very fact that terms like ‘imperial presidency’ or ‘all-powerful Assembly’ are part of the political discourse underscores the failure of existing checks and balances,” he said. “Reforming the Constitution is no longer something that can wait.”

He called on Korea’s political leaders to build consensus and engage the public directly in the reform process, an idea echoed by Lim.

“So far, constitutional reform has largely been confined to political circles,” Lim said. “Whoever wins the presidency will need to bring the public into the conversation to build broader consensus.”

BY MICHAEL LEE [[email protected]]