PPP lawmakers weigh risks under leadership system

A lawmaker from South Korea’s conservative opposition People Power Party has questioned why reform-minded members who are critical of party leader Jang Dong-hyeok’s leadership are not speaking out more forcefully, and why senior figures appear to be keeping their distance.

The lawmaker said they could not dismiss the possibility that Jang could wield influence over candidate nominations for the 2028 general elections. Under the party’s current leadership election rules, which allocate 80 percent weight to party members and 20 percent to public opinion polling with an anti–strategic voting provision, Jang’s strong backing from the party’s hardline base could give him an advantage in a future leadership contest. In that scenario, openly opposing him without a clear fallback plan could carry political risks, including the possibility of losing nomination opportunities in the next general election. For many lawmakers, caution has become the more rational course.

That calculation, according to multiple party members, is widely shared within the PPP. They say the dominance of the hardline base, combined with lawmakers’ reluctance to speak out, is closely tied to the party’s leadership election structure.

The current system traces back to internal turmoil following former President Yoon Suk Yeol. At the June 2021 party convention, then first-term lawmaker Lee Jun-seok, in his 30s, won the leadership race on the strength of strong public support. But during the Yoon administration, tensions between Lee and the pro-Yoon faction escalated into an internal power struggle that ultimately led to his removal from party leadership.

After consolidating control, the pro-Yoon camp argued that “party members are the owners of the party” and overhauled the leadership election system, shifting it from a 70 percent party member and 30 percent public opinion model to a fully party member-based vote. Despite warnings that reducing public input could distort political incentives, the change was pushed through with the aim of blocking non–pro-Yoon factions from taking control.

The result of removing public opinion from the process was reflected in the party’s heavy defeat in the April 2024 general election. After that loss, lawmakers, particularly from the Seoul metropolitan area, pushed to restore a stronger role for public opinion in leadership contests. The compromise produced the current 80 percent party member and 20 percent public opinion structure.

But many younger lawmakers now argue that even this adjustment is no longer sufficient. They point out that conditions have continued to shift since the 2024 and 2025 leadership races, both held under the same 20 percent public opinion formula. In the wake of former President Yoon’s martial law declaration and impeachment, they say the party’s hardline base has become even more entrenched, increasing its influence over internal elections and leadership dynamics.

There is growing concern that without a stronger counterbalance from broader public opinion, the gap between the party’s direction and mainstream voter sentiment will continue to widen.

Lawmakers elected under a system heavily shaped by hardline supporters, they argue, inevitably develop political obligations to that base. Without structural reform, many inside the party warn that the PPP’s disconnect from centrist voters is likely to persist regardless of who leads it.

Political parties ultimately exist to win elections and secure governing power. The PPP achieved that just four years ago. Many lawmakers recall that victory as the result of coalition-building and responsiveness to public sentiment rather than factional consolidation.

If the party hopes to reestablish itself as a governing force, lawmakers say it must revisit its leadership election rules and move closer to mainstream voter sentiment in shaping its future direction.