Go to contents

[Editorial] Political Reform Should Precede Debate over Cabinet System

[Editorial] Political Reform Should Precede Debate over Cabinet System

Posted January. 14, 2003 22:45,   

한국어

The case for constitutional revision is getting momentum. The opposition Grand National Party (GNP)’s floor leader demanded a cabinet-run system of government through constitutional revision, the ruling Millennium Democratic Party MDP) responded to the demand positively and the United Liberal Democrats (ULD) has been falling into step. There are even talks that the GNP is ready to replace the president system stated in its party platform with the cabinet system.

Of course, the current five-year single-term president system is not the best. In that under the successive Roh Tae-woo, Kim Young-sam and Kim Dae-jung governments the system failed to work properly, there is a need for the consideration of constitutional revision. In addition, the bad effects of the power monopoly by the president, even when he was elected by a slight margin of 1 %, back up the case for constitutional revision for the cabinet system.

However, this paper believes that the current debate on the cabinet-run system for some reasons is not right.

First, political reform should precede constitutional revision. The cardinal point of the political reform is to prepare a device to help change the current "high-cost and low-efficiency politics" to a "low-cost and high-efficiency politics." To do so, reform of political parties is very urgent. Ruling and opposition parties’ promise of party reform are much likely to end up as empty rhetoric, given that they have yet to suggest any measures in detail. Rather, they put the issue of party reform on the back burner and are engaged in struggles for party leadership. Against this backdrop, the debate on reform of the power structure cannot get people’s understanding of its relevance.

Second, it is suspected that the case for constitutional revision is related to political interests of specific factions and individuals within the ruling and opposition parties. In the case of the MDP, chairman Hahn Hwa-gap and the so-called "Donggyo-dong group," whose room for movement within the party has been shrunk, are strongly arguing for the cabinet system. Meanwhile, in the GNP, leading figures from the southeast Gyeongsang provinces and young members from the Seoul metropolitan areas are at odds. Whatever the cause of constitutional revision is, it cannot be used as a tool for the political interest of specific factions or individuals.

Last but not least, it is not proper in time for the President-elect to raise the issue of constitutional revision even before inauguration. Now, the political world should get people’s confidence by reforming itself. In the right order, the debate over the cabinet-run system should come after getting back the public trust.