Constitutional amendment bill fails in South Korean parliament amid boycott

The failure of the constitutional amendment bill to pass the National Assembly, primarily due to the abstention of the People Power Party, represents a significant setback for progressive forces in South Korea. The Presidential Office's strong statement urging the People Power Party to vote responsibly underscores the deep political divisions surrounding this crucial legislative effort. The bill, which aimed to incorporate the spirit of the May 18th Democratic Uprising and the Busan-Masan Uprising into the constitution's preamble and strengthen regulations on martial law, was seen as a vital step towards solidifying democratic principles.

“

As the amendment bill is a promise to the people, we express our regret that it failed to pass due to a refusal to vote.

By refusing to participate in the vote, the People Power Party effectively blocked a measure that garnered support from six other parties, including the main opposition Democratic Party. This move is particularly contentious given the bill's provisions, which many view as essential for preventing future abuses of power, such as the imposition of unlawful martial law. President Yoon Suk Yeol himself had previously urged for the bill's passage, framing opposition to it as support for potential illegal martial law declarations.

“

We will consider what measures are possible within the legal and institutional framework to fulfill the purpose of the constitutional amendment.

From a South Korean perspective, the inability to pass such a fundamental amendment highlights the persistent challenges in achieving national consensus on core democratic values and historical memory. The Presidential Office's commitment to exploring further avenues for constitutional reform suggests a determination to overcome this legislative hurdle. However, the current political climate, marked by partisan gridlock, raises questions about the feasibility of future attempts. The incident serves as a stark reminder of how political maneuvering can impede progress on issues deeply connected to the nation's democratic identity and historical justice.

“

Let's not allow illegal martial law anymore. What citizen would oppose that? Those who oppose it must be seen as proponents of illegal martial law.