By Kang Hyun-kyung
A group of lawmakers wanting to amend the Constitution to prevent abuses of power has gained the upper hand following the corruption scandal that is rattling President Park Geun-hye’s government.
Rep. Woo Yoon-keun, floor leader of the main opposition New Politics Alliance for Democracy (NPAD), said in an interview Sunday that rebalancing presidential power through a constitutional revision is the only way to curb corruption.
Regarding rumors that many politicians received bribes from the late businessman Sung Woan-jong, the Woo claimed that the root cause of this is structural.
“I think the case is more about the system than individuals. So we can only remove the root cause of corruption when we reform the current political structure because it is the main cause of corrupt practices,” he said. “The corruption scandal made us conclude that constitutional revision is the answer to the problem.”
Another constitutional reform advocate, Rep. Lee Jae-oh of the ruling Saenuri Party, also spoke of the need for a revision.
During a conference at the National Assembly, Saturday, the hardliner said the source of political corruption is the current presidential system allowing the head of state to exercise an enormous level of power.
“Under the Constitution, a president is overly empowered and cannot be properly checked or balanced by any other constitutional institutions,” he said. “Opponents of a constitutional reform have no will to change the troubled system that has become a conduit for corruption.”
Scholars, and religious and opinion leaders attended the conference hosted by the so-called Alliance for Constitutional Revision. They adopted a resolution calling for nationwide support for reform.
Members of the group in the Assembly plan to hold an international seminar in June to create public opinion in favor of reform. The 155-member group said they will invite national and European political leaders and scholars as speakers or discussants at the seminar.
The drive to rewrite the Constitution has had its ups and downs in every government.
Proponents claim that the current Constitution has not changed for several decades since it was amended in the late 1980s as a result of pro-democracy protests and thus has to be changed to embrace sociopolitical changes since then.
Opponents, including President Park, however, countered the claim, saying there are other urgent policy challenges to be tackled and constitutional change is not urgent.