Democratic Party faces backlash over sudden bill reversal

Democratic Party of Korea candidate for Gangwon Province governor Woo Sang-ho offered a rare self-critical remark about his party’s electoral instincts, saying it has a tendency to undermine itself when momentum is on its side.

“The Democratic Party has a strange habit of sabotaging itself when the election atmosphere is good,” Woo said during a May 6 appearance on YTN Radio’s “Jang Sung-chul’s News Plaza.”

His comments referred to the party’s abrupt reversal on a controversial bill that was introduced only days earlier.

On April 30, the Democratic Party proposed the so-called “Special Counsel Act on Fabricated Indictments and Investigations,” which included provisions related to cases involving President Lee Jae-myung. The ruling party initially vowed to pass the bill before the June 3 local elections but reversed course within four days, postponing consideration until after the vote. The shift followed signals from President Lee himself, who called for a slower, more deliberative approach, effectively prompting the party to change direction.

The episode has rippled beyond internal party politics. In key battlegrounds, including parts of the Yeongnam region and closely contested districts in the greater Seoul area, the controversy has fueled a conservative backlash. The People Power Party has seized on the issue, framing it as an attack on judicial order and making it a central theme of its campaign. Inside the Democratic Party, frustration surfaced almost immediately after the bill was introduced, with several lawmakers saying the timing was politically risky during an active election period.

A Seoul-based first-term lawmaker, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the bill should have been reviewed in a full party caucus before being introduced. A senior lawmaker in Incheon argued the party should have pursued an investigation first and only then considered remedies such as the withdrawal of indictments.

Kim Boo-kyum, a Democratic Party candidate for Daegu mayor, publicly urged caution on May 3, saying, “If we are not prepared to abandon colleagues who are working hard on the campaign trail, then this needs to be handled carefully.”

Despite the internal concerns, the party initially handed the matter to its leadership structure after Han Byung-do ran unopposed for floor leader on May 6, saying the issue would be revisited in a caucus meeting.

But the situation shifted again on May 4, when President Lee, through presidential chief of staff for political affairs Hong Ik-pyo, urged the party to decide timing and procedure after gathering public opinion and internal deliberation.

Han later said discussions would be postponed until after further review and public consultation, effectively pushing any decision beyond the local elections.

The opposition has since intensified pressure. The People Power Party has made the issue a centerpiece of its campaign message, forcing Democratic Party candidates onto the defensive. In the Seoul mayoral race, candidate Oh Se-hoon repeatedly pressed Democratic Party candidate Jung Won-oh to clarify his position, while Jung has avoided taking a clear stance, calling it a matter for the legislature.

Some Democratic Party candidates have acknowledged the need to revisit the proposal, but the issue has nonetheless become a political liability on the campaign trail. Within the party, calls are growing for a full accounting of how the bill moved from drafting to public announcement and then rapid reversal. Some officials argue that, given the National Assembly’s schedule for electing a speaker around May 20, passage before the local elections was likely unrealistic from the outset.

Questions are also growing over whether the push was driven by pressure from hard-line factions, coordination with the presidential office or political miscalculation during a vacuum in the party’s floor leadership. Particular attention is now centered on provisions allowing the withdrawal of indictments, with party insiders demanding a clearer explanation of how the clause was included in the bill. Some within the party argue that those responsible should be held accountable if procedural or strategic failures are confirmed.