Go to contents

[Opinion] Escape from the Responsibility of Politics

Posted May. 08, 2002 08:56,   


President Kim Dee-Jung left MDP.

Therefore, recent three Presidents left the ruling party during the term, besides former President Roh Tae-Woo and Kim Young-Sam; however, they share common points that they resumed office at the time of going towards democracy after authoritative regime went down.

Nevertheless, all of them, by withdrawing from the ruling party, during the term, approved how low level our responsibility of politics is.

Contradiction and tragedy of our politics is this point.

Originally, politics by parties meant politics of responsibility.

In case one party resumes, it is the logics of responsible politics that let people decide re-appointment through evaluation that it achieved election pledge well or not.

Therefore, we should consider Presidential elections as choosing political group, which regards him as symbolic deputy rather than procedure of selecting independent President.

So, if President, who accepted people`s suffering with the ruling party together, leave the ruling party, voters lose the subject of rational evaluation and call into account.

If it is President for single term, it is more serious.

It means achievement of politics of responsibility becomes blocked basically.

However, there is no one in the ruling party who objects this or protest politically even though leaving ruling party by the President has become a convention.

It shows how futile our politics of party is.

We can peep into intention through President`s withdrawal from the ruling party to use the party not as path of achieving politics of responsibility but as means of escaping from political responsibility.

They say that they leave the ruling party in order to have fair management of Presidential elections, however, in fact, they withdrew from the party for escaping political crisis that is caused by corruption or politics, everybody knows.

They wanted to use the ruling party as a kind of sacrificial lamb for political responsibility, which they should take burden of.

This becomes clearer in insistence that withdrawal of President is an inevitable choice to maintain neutrality and secure objectivity of national affairs.

If it is like this theory, it means that all of political unfairness or corruption is far from the connection with the ruling party so far.

It is extreme avoidance of self-responsibility.

And in the insistence that President should keep distance for neutral national affairs, they understand politics of party as group game only and there is no perception that it is device to reflect people`s political demand of national affairs.

Further more, the thought that it is possible to pursue rational measures when President is separated from the party, is the starting point of dogma and egotism.

Even it is detected intention and plan for avoiding inspection of the opposition party and watch, it lacks intention to respond to people`s demand.

We can read escape from the politics of responsibility in this very point.

In addition, responsibility of President himself is added to withdrawal of President Kim Dae Jung.

If corruption and suspicion related to his son and relatives become social issue, and it became main reason for withdrawing from the ruling party, President himself should have apologized before people and should have shown direction for solving out the matter.

There was lack of calling in self-responsibility regarding President`s own ethical morality.

However, what could be the reason for such irresponsibility and non-ethics to settle down as feature of democratic progress.

Isn`t it because eliminating a regime did not induce political deputy to obey to people but contributed in expansion of self-control of political leader?

Seeing that all of three Presidents were elected for single term appointment system, which is initially done in constitutional history, we can estimate that single appointment might be one of the reasons to urge political irresponsibility.

However, it must be because people`s control and inspection regarding the power stays still at weak level above all else.

There is no royal way to progress democracy.

We should remember golden words of democracy again that only people who are awakened can be treated as national people.

Park Jae Chang (Prof. Sukmyeong Women`s University, Congress Administration)