[Editorial] Vote of Confidence, End in “Political Compromise”?

President Roh Moo-hyun announced yesterday he will make a political compromise with the assessment of public confidence in a meeting with the party leaders after participating in the APEC (Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation) summit meeting.

We already pointed that “national referendum on his leadership” was not appropriate as a means to settle the chaotic condition of national affairs and raised the question that the extreme prescription of a national referendum was inevitably made to cope with the

defamation of morality due to the absurdities of his close aides. And we also stressed that the present programs for revamping state affairs prior to asking the public confidence on his leadership. Of course there are some unconstitutional elements.

We can`t say definitely what kind of conclusion will be reached after the deliberations in the political community. However, given what the president said, in reality, it is hard to enforce a national referendum if all parties are opposed to the idea. The president and other party leaders have to agree not to discuss the national referendum on presidential leadership and seek another plan.

We think the president has to show his pledge to revamp state affairs before anything else. In other words, he has to analyze the causes in which he couldn`t help asking the public confidence on his leadership after only eight months in office and to consider alternative plans. The president also has to reshuffle his staff in the Blue House and the ministers.

After that, he has to be assessed in the upcoming General Election in April next year, or to follow procedures to put his leadership in the public`s hands under the agreement in the political community. If holding a referendum on his leadership, it has to be cleared up whether a referendum is constitutional through the Constitutional Court under the existing law.

The important thing is this issue can`t be dodged under any circumstances. The national referendum on the presidential leadership is never a matter of a one time event. The president has to take full responsibility for the disruption and confusion of national opinion on this, even though he may think his proposal of “assessment of public confidence” could make royalists collect and show off his morality.

The president of a country can`t lead state affairs in this way. Roh`s public confidence action can`t avoid the criticism that it was primarily a hasty and irresponsible decision.