Bipartisan Consensus Crucial for Constitutional Amendment, Says People Power Party Leader Song Eon-seok

In a strong rebuttal to accusations surrounding the stalled constitutional amendment, People Power Party floor leader Song Eon-seok underscored the fundamental necessity of bipartisan consensus for any such significant undertaking. His remarks, delivered to reporters following the National Assembly session's adjournment, directly challenged the narrative pushed by National Assembly Speaker Woo Won-shik and the Democratic Party, who blamed the People Power Party for derailing the amendment process.

“

Constitutional amendment requires bipartisan agreement.

Song meticulously detailed the procedural objections raised by his party, citing the principle of non-repetition (ilsa-bujui) which, he argued, prohibits the re-tabling of a motion rejected in the same session without prior agreement. He framed the Speaker's decision to proceed with the amendment, despite the People Power Party's intention to filibuster, as an arbitrary act that left his party with no choice but to employ parliamentary tactics to prevent what they deemed a 'clearly unconstitutional' move.

“

The act of tabling the constitutional amendment bill that was rejected yesterday itself violates the principle of non-repetition, which prohibits re-tabling a rejected bill in the same session. It was a situation where our party had no choice but to respond with a filibuster because the Speaker unilaterally convened the plenary session without agreement between the negotiating bodies.

The floor leader's critique extended to a broader accusation that the Democratic Party was treating the constitution with disrespect, using it as a political tool. He questioned the sincerity of the opposition's amendment push, suggesting it might have been a calculated effort to create a pretext for blaming the People Power Party, thereby manufacturing a negative image of the party as 'pro-martial law' to gain an advantage in the upcoming local elections.

“

Is the constitution the Democratic Party's toy, which they uphold when they like it and break when they don't?

From the perspective of the Hankyoreh, which often scrutinizes conservative parties, Song's defense highlights the deep partisan animosity and procedural battles that characterize South Korean politics. His call for including historical events like the May 18th Democratization Movement and the Saemaul Undong (New Village Movement) in the constitution's preamble, while seemingly inclusive, also reflects a conservative attempt to shape the national narrative. The insistence on bipartisan agreement, while procedurally sound, is presented here as a strategic move in a larger political game, particularly concerning the upcoming elections.

“

Did you have the will to amend the constitution? Or did you need a record of the People Power Party opposing it while pushing for the constitutional amendment without bipartisan agreement? Was there an intention to gain an advantageous position in the local elections by imposing the nasty frame of being a party that defends martial law?