GNP divided over changing presidential term limit in Constitution

Posted on : 2011-01-06 14:38 KST Modified on : 2019-10-19 20:29 KST
The GNP leadership has drawn fire for prioritizing the issue late in the term and with other urgent issues unresolved
 Jan. 5. (Photo by Tak Ki-hyoung)
Jan. 5. (Photo by Tak Ki-hyoung)

Seung Yeon-cheol 

 

The leadership of the ruling Grand National Party (GNP) is drawing criticism not only from the opposition, but from its own ranks after deciding to resume formal discussions of an impracticable amendment of the Constitution. The proposed amendment would adopt a two-term four-year presidency similar to the United States to replace South Korea’s current single-term, five-year system.

During a joint meeting of its Supreme Council and senior members Wednesday, the GNP decided to hold a general meeting of lawmakers some time in mid to late January in order to discuss the amendment issue. At the meeting, Lawmaker Chung Ui-hwa, a member of the Lee Myung-bak faction, said, “We must consider amending the Constitution to reorganize a power structure in which power is excessively concentrated with the president.”

GNP Chairman Ahn Sang-soo, who has repeatedly remarked on the need for amendment, said, “We are initiating discussions because we already made a promise to the people of South Korea to do so during the 17th National Assembly.”

Floor leader Kim Moo-sung lent his support to the amendment, saying, “The current presidential system is a failure, with all former presidents being ousted from their party.”

However, members of the Park Geun-hye faction who attended the meeting expressed objections to even discussing the issue.

GNP Supreme Council member Suh Byung-soo said that while the Lee faction lawmakers were talking about a decentralized presidential system, “It is difficult to distinguish internal and external administration in a situation where our economy is highly dependent on the outside and we are in a confrontation with North Korea.”

“I object to even holding a general meeting on amendment of the Constitution,” Suh said.

Lawmaker Lee Kyeong-jae said, “I hope we can stop having these discussions about amending the Constitution, which keep coming up like a broken record.”

While an agreement was reached after some debate to hold the general meeting within January, even Lee faction lawmakers were asking why the issue was being broached again when the prospects of an actual amendment are unlikely.

GNP Supreme Council member Chung Doo-un said Wednesday that the argument for amending the Constitution “will naturally be put to bed at the general meeting, since it has already lost momentum.”

Another Supreme Council member, Hong Joon-pyo, said in a television interview the day before, “A late-term president has no power to amend the Constitution, and even the potential candidates [for the 2012 election] are opposed.”

“If we hold discussions on amending the Constitution now, it will be like the amendment to the Sejong City Development Plan situation,” Hong added. “All it will do is tarnish the prestige and image of the president.”

Some within the party expressed the position that the timing was inappropriate. According to these lawmakers, amendment of the Constitution is not an issue that citizens are concerned about amid a situation of national security anxieties, raging foot-and-mouth disease and avian influenza, and economic difficulties for working class citizens due to rising key money and commodity prices.

In a telephone interview with the Hankyoreh, GNP Lawmaker Kwon Young-se said, “What are South Koreans worried about more right now? They are going to say, ’Politicians were really taking it easy, and now they are suddenly talking about this out of nowhere.’”

Opposition party lawmakers were also dismissive.

“Can they discuss power sharing when they appoint a former senior presidential secretary for civil affairs as chairman of the Board of Audit and Inspection?” Chairman Sohn Hak-kyu asked during a meeting of the main opposition Democratic Party (DP) Supreme Council in Gunsan on Wednesday. “They should try following the Constitution before discussing power sharing, and only then discuss amending the Constitution.”

“Farmers are weeping over the Four Major Rivers Restoration Project and foot-and-mouth disease,” DP spokeswoman Cha Young said in a statement. “Is amending the Constitution more urgent than foot-and-mouth disease right now?”

  

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

 

 

Most viewed articles