5·18 Group: Political Circles Responsible for Failed Constitutional Amendment Vote, Urge Resumption of Discussions
Translated from Korean, summarized and contextualized by DistantNews.
TLDR
- A 5.18 commemoration group criticizes the political establishment for the failure to pass a constitutional amendment bill in the National Assembly.
- The bill failed due to the boycott by all 106 members of the People Power Party, preventing the required quorum of 191 votes.
- The group urges politicians to take responsibility and resume discussions on the amendment, which includes provisions for the spirit of the 5.18 democratization movement and parliamentary approval of emergency decrees.
The Hankyoreh reports on the strong condemnation from a 5.18 commemoration group following the failure of a constitutional amendment bill to pass the National Assembly. The group squarely places the blame on the political parties, particularly the People Power Party, for boycotting the vote and thus preventing the necessary quorum.
This incident highlights a deep dissatisfaction with the current political landscape and its perceived inability to address fundamental issues. The 5.18 group views the failed amendment as a missed opportunity to embed the spirit of democratic movements, like the 5.18 Uprising, into the nation's foundational law. Their statement emphasizes the political responsibility of lawmakers to uphold the will of the people and reform the constitutional framework.
From a South Korean perspective, the legacy of historical democratization movements is a sensitive and crucial element of national identity. The failure to enshrine these principles in the constitution is seen not just as a procedural setback but as a betrayal of democratic values. The Hankyoreh, known for its progressive stance, frames this event as a stark example of political inertia and a disregard for public demand for constitutional reform, urging a renewed commitment to the process.
Originally published by Hankyoreh in Korean. Translated, summarized, and contextualized by our editorial team with added local perspective. Read our editorial standards.